Why the United States is not on board with International Law?

by **tim** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:31 am

why the United States is not on board with all of the efforts, tribunals, courts, and declarations of international law

by **baigh** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:34 am

Why would any sovereign nation be 'on board' with 'International Law'? Countries can and should have treaties with specific terms but 'International Law' created by a handful of who knows what is a foolish surrender if sovereignty.

by **troyes** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:38 am

Because our own standards, customs, and practices are even more advanced than the "international" institutions. Surrendering any power to the UN would be a step BACK for the US.

Take control of the Internet for example. Handing it over to ANY international body would automatically decrease America's influence of it, while increasing the influence of such upstanding paragons of free expression as China or Russia.

US may be imperfect, but the alternatives are (much) worse.

by **gowan** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:41 am

The United States Supreme Court already has been citing international law in some of its rulings as it "interprets" the US Constitution.
It shouldn't be, but it is.

by **jen** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:44 am

Because so many of us think they they are above the law.

by **said99** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:48 am

Because so many of us think they they are above the law.

Well to tell the truth there is a thing called the UCC or the Universal Commerce Code...the law of the sea....and is universal.....Admiralty Jurisdiction..... It's the "secret" jurisdiction our courts have been under sense 1965.....

by **matchitisiw** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 6:01 am

because USA rule the f***ing world... deal with that fact.. ******

Advertisments:

Sponsor Links: