America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

by Shirina Thu Apr 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Recently, the United Nations passed a resolution/treaty that would help keep arms - from combat aircraft to small arms - from being sold to terrorists and organized crime syndicates.

The US Congress passed an amendment that prevented the United States from signing that treaty. Why? Because of the National Rifle Association and the massive number of cronies in congress that belong to that organization, convinced everyone that the UN resolution would endanger our 2nd Amendment "right" to bear arms. How? Well ... it doesn't. The treaty specifically states that it will not infringe upon the sovereignty of signatory nations to regulate and control guns within their borders each according to its governmental and constitutional systems.

But no. Fear mongering and propaganda for the low IQ folks made it so that America couldn't sign the treaty.

So why, then, does this mean that America has joined with the Axis of Evil?

Because the only other nations that refused to sign the UN treaty were Iran, Syria, and North Korea.

Quite frankly, as an American, I'm embarrassed. How can this nation continue to wave our sense of so-called "Christian" morality in everyone else's faces or continue to denounce Iran and North Korea if we so obviously share THEIR morality?

I feel like digging a hole and burying myself in it. As for the many conservatives who constantly pick on liberals by claiming we should move to Iran or North Korea if we don't like America, well ... it looks like we don't have to. Between fundamentalist religion and bad foreign policy, it's getting harder to tell the difference between "us" and "them."

by oftenwrong Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:07 pm

Arms manufacture produces serious levels of Profit. Which may have been a contributory factor.

by ROB Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:28 pm

Shirina wrote:
The US Congress passed an amendment…

United States Constitution, Article 5

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

The United States Congress cannot have “passed” an amendment; the United States Congress can “propose” an amendment, and the United States Congress can “call a Convention for proposing” an amendment.

by Shirina Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:37 pm

So who would oppose such a successful U.S. foreign policy initiative? North Korea, Iran and Syria were alone in voting against it in the U.N. General Assembly. But they were joined in their condemnation by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 53 U.S. senators, mostly Republicans, who voted for a James Inhofe (R-Okla.)-sponsored nonbinding amendment casting the ATT as a threat to the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

LINK

by ROB Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:43 pm

Shirina wrote:
So who would oppose such a successful U.S. foreign policy initiative? North Korea, Iran and Syria were alone in voting against it in the U.N. General Assembly. But they were joined in their condemnation by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 53 U.S. senators, mostly Republicans, who voted for a James Inhofe (R-Okla.)-sponsored nonbinding amendment casting the ATT as a threat to the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

LINK

Shirina wrote:
The US Congress passed an amendment…

United States Constitution, Article 5

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

The United States Congress cannot have “passed” an amendment; the United States Congress can “propose” an amendment, and the United States Congress can “call a Convention for proposing” an amendment.

by **Ivan** Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:34 am

I do hope that technicalities are not going to be allowed to derail what has the potential to be an interesting thread.

I think ‘Dubya’ Bush’s original ‘Axis of Evil’ was Iran, Iraq and North Korea, and then John R. Bolton added three more who he said were ‘beyond the Axis of Evil’ – Cuba, Libya and Syria.

There is of course nothing new in supplying help to terrorists. Ronald Reagan gave assistance to people trying to overthrow the government of Nicaragua. That included giving them the proceeds of clandestine sales of military equipment supplied to what was by then the Islamofascist state of Iran.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/269619.stm

I also feel embarrassed sometimes. Embarrassed to be a citizen (I won’t call myself anyone’s ‘subject’) of a country which has nuclear weapons but tries to tell other countries that they can’t have them. I know that countries such as the USA and UK are considered ‘stable’, aren’t ruled by lunatics like North Korea (though I do sometimes wonder) and don’t go threatening to “wipe countries off the map” as that genial fellow who runs Iran has done. However, it must make us appear as arrogant and hypocritical in the eyes of many people across the world.

by ROB Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:26 am

Ivan wrote:
I do hope that technicalities are not going to be allowed to derail what has the potential to be an interesting thread.

It’s not “technicalities”; unlike the UK’s unwritten constitution, in my country the precisely and concisely written United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, period.

The United Nations passed a United States-proposed measure, a resolution, which “ain’t chopped liver” if the UN finds enough grit to make it stick, and a treaty. Since it’s a treaty, the US Constitution makes certain things clear.

Treaties are ratified into law (“to make Treaties”), not passed into law.
It is not within the authority of either House of Congress to ratify a treaty.
The United States President submits proposed treaties to the United States Senate.
The United States Senate ratifies by two thirds vote proposed treaties presented to it by the United States President.
When ratified, treaties effectively become part of the United States Constitution, and as such are the supreme law of the land.

The language in the United States Constitution follows.

United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, Paragraph 2

He [the President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

United States Constitution, Article 6, Paragraph 2

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

As can be seen, nonbinding verbiage attached to a Senate budget bill, which cannot become law until both houses pass the exact same identical bill, and if passed by less than two-thirds vote in either house, the president signs it into law, has no legal effect on a ratified treaty. This verbiage ain’t nothing but “jaw-jacking” which has about as much chance of becoming law as an order of Bar-b-que ribs and brisket from Rudy’s has of surviving the night at my house. Does anyone really think that President Obama would sign into law a bill that trashed the UN resolution and treaty proposed by his administration at his direction?

by ROB Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:38 am

Ivan wrote:
I also feel embarrassed sometimes. Embarrassed to be a citizen (I won’t call myself anyone’s ‘subject’) of a country which has nuclear weapons but tries to tell other countries that they can’t have them. I know that countries such as the USA and UK are considered ‘stable’, aren’t ruled by lunatics like North Korea (though I do sometimes wonder) and don’t go threatening to “wipe countries off the map” as that genial fellow who runs Iran has done. However, it must make us appear as arrogant and hypocritical in the eyes of many people across the world.

It’s not arrogance, it’s truth. Among nations with nukes, there are but three that I trust completely, and you’ve named two of them. I once trusted the Soviet Union to a certain extent, once Gorbachev came to power, but I remember when Gorbachev said, “keep the empire intact”, and I agreed with him, much to the chagrin of my emotional friends. Mr. Gorbachev was right on target; now it’s no telling who might have ex-Soviet nukes, and I don’t trust any of the “stans” with nukes as far as I could throw all of them with my pink finger.

by oftenwrong Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:34 am

Pedantry can be rather boring to the onlooker, but of course the Law of any nation has to be, as far as possible, clear and unambiguous. Lawyers buy nice houses and new cars out of poorly-drafted legislation.

by oftenwrong Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:16 pm

America joins the 'Axis of Evil' _96528417_mediaitem96528416

What was that?
What was what?
That almighty bang just now.
I don't know, but whatever it was it woke me up!
Did we hit something?
I didn't see anything.
Well, you wouldn't would you, if you were asleep.

Do you think we should wake The Captain?
No, what's the point? If that didn't wake him then nothing will.

"Steersman, keep a sharp lookout!"
Aye-aye Sir. Steady as she goes.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/maritime-mystery-why-a-us-destroyer-failed-to-dodge-a-cargo-ship/ar-BBD67t6?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=mailsignout

by Sponsored content

America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'

What was that?

Re: America joins the 'Axis of Evil'