03-20-2003, 09:37 PM
That appealing to the UN is not the first step of any government, but is awlays an option of any government when they run into a difficulty with a third party.
What I never read in the Charter was the requirement to only accept the UN as final authority, which would imply that a measure of sovreignty is forfeited by becoming a member nation.
I have not read the Charter recently, and I think I will read it again. As it is not committed to memory, my memory goes back to the points it raised when I did some research about 10 years ago on the modes of blockade and embargo, and how that fit into multilateralism, an American security policy that has not changed since then, and attempts at 'bloodless persuasion' to resolve international dilemas.
What I never read in the Charter was the requirement to only accept the UN as final authority, which would imply that a measure of sovreignty is forfeited by becoming a member nation.
I have not read the Charter recently, and I think I will read it again. As it is not committed to memory, my memory goes back to the points it raised when I did some research about 10 years ago on the modes of blockade and embargo, and how that fit into multilateralism, an American security policy that has not changed since then, and attempts at 'bloodless persuasion' to resolve international dilemas.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete