Well, the US government if you think about it is a bunch of different cultures governed under one roof.

You took the words right out of my mouth. If you look back at the problems faced by our founding fathers, you will see very similar challenges. For those of you who know your history, think of the Great Compromise of 1787 [which you can read about here].

Small state delegates claimed that they would be overwhelmed in a Senate with proportional representation. They said that the three largest states could outvote the rest of the country…

Gunning Bedford, Jr. of Delaware declared that if the Senate did not have equality, “the small [states] w[ould] find some foreign ally of more honor and good faith, who will take them by the hand and do them justice.�

In a sense, that’s the compromise we would be asking all nations to make. As a libertarian at heart, I don’t believe in a large government so you would think I would be opposed to anything that would add another layer.

 

With that said, I think that there is a NEED for a global government in a global economy. I can’t wipe my butt without the need for products from half a dozen nations! I would want this global government to have a VERY limited scope. They need to have the authority to handle all military actions [new and improved NATO+G8], anything to do with the environment [uNFCC et all], and anything involving world health [like the WHO]. I also wouldn’t mind a single body to be international police [interpol] with authority in every country.

 

I just don't want to PAY for it... :plain

The notion of a global army is a tricky one, though.

 

On the one hand, whatever world government is created would need an enforcement branch to make sure it doesn't get stepped over like the organizations we've had in the past. It isn't enough to rely on nations' good will towards agreements, because as we've seen in the past it works sometimes but its really a crapshoot. The United States government has authority because our laws are backed by a powerful (though limited) enforcement branch. The United Nations is walked over, as was the League of Nations, because there is no enforcement power present.

 

I think everyone sees the need for a standing army, or whatever it would be called, for the success of the global government. But the problem is, there are no citizens of the world. It's not possible to freely move between nation-states as it is (relatively) simple to cross between state borders within the United States. Being a citizen of one country over another means something in the world (hence why you see so many Mexicans attempting to have their children born in the United States and then returning them to Mexico). Now, since there are no global citizens and only citizens of nation-states, we are presented with the issue of a global army running with soldiers from the United States, Great Britain, France, etc. I harken this issue back to the Confederate States of America (the first one, before the Constitution took effect in 1789). The national government couldn't put together an army to squash rebellions because the army was Georgian citizens, citizens of Massachusetts, etc. instead of United States' citizens.

 

I think, as yankeefan21 began to point out, the United States' struggle with a confederacy from 1781-1788 is a very good example for how things are playing out and will continue to unfold in the future. Nation-states will argue back and forth because of the extreme they are on compared to one another. It's obvious that at the beginning of this whole process, the United States will have to hold the burden of a large chunk of the cost and getting things done. But that would be for good I believe (well, not the money aspect :lol ) since I think that if our eventual world government turns out exactly like the framework the Constitution laid out for the United States, we'd be doing ourselves well.

At this point the evidence still leads me to believe this administration lied

 

The Clinton administration were saying the exact same things and making the exact same claims as the Bush administration, the only difference is W actually did something about it.

There is no way the Bush Administration pulled this out of their ass in order for the country to go to war. To gain WHAT? Yeah, I'm sure we're going to set up our very own oil pumps there shortly.

 

I completely understand being against the war, I was for a time a proponent of it, though no longer - but to make accusations that the Administration fabricated their intelligence to go to war with Iraq, that is just plain stupid.

 

Some of you people need to evaluate whether or not the nature of your disagreements with President Bush are your own thinking.

ya and this administration has further drowned us into more debt then ever and caused many unnecessary deaths.

ya and this administration has further drowned us into more debt then ever and caused many unnecessary deaths.

 

 

Ooo OooO!

 

 

 

RED HERRING!

There is no way the Bush Administration pulled this out of their ass in order for the country to go to war. To gain WHAT? Yeah, I'm sure we're going to set up our very own oil pumps there shortly.

 

I completely understand being against the war, I was for a time a proponent of it, though no longer - but to make accusations that the Administration fabricated their intelligence to go to war with Iraq, that is just plain stupid.

 

Some of you people need to evaluate whether or not the nature of your disagreements with President Bush are your own thinking.

 

 

i still maintain it was largely due to him finishing daddy's job....why else would he have been planning this before even taking office.

There is no way the Bush Administration pulled this out of their ass in order for the country to go to war. To gain WHAT? Yeah, I'm sure we're going to set up our very own oil pumps there shortly.

 

I completely understand being against the war, I was for a time a proponent of it, though no longer - but to make accusations that the Administration fabricated their intelligence to go to war with Iraq, that is just plain stupid.

 

Some of you people need to evaluate whether or not the nature of your disagreements with President Bush are your own thinking.

 

 

i still maintain it was largely due to him finishing daddy's job....why else would he have been planning this before even taking office.

 

If you think he wanted this for his own personal reasons, it makes PERFECT sense that he'd do it shortly before beginning his reelection campaign.

 

Yeah, right.

There is no way the Bush Administration pulled this out of their ass in order for the country to go to war. To gain WHAT? Yeah, I'm sure we're going to set up our very own oil pumps there shortly.

 

I completely understand being against the war, I was for a time a proponent of it, though no longer - but to make accusations that the Administration fabricated their intelligence to go to war with Iraq, that is just plain stupid.

 

Some of you people need to evaluate whether or not the nature of your disagreements with President Bush are your own thinking.

 

 

i still maintain it was largely due to him finishing daddy's job....why else would he have been planning this before even taking office.

 

If you think he wanted this for his own personal reasons, it makes PERFECT sense that he'd do it shortly before beginning his reelection campaign.

 

Yeah, right.

it does.

 

he thought it was going to be a simple job. 6 months AT MOST.

 

Take the momentum from that victory into the 2k4 election and win in a landslide.

At this point the evidence still leads me to believe this administration lied

 

The Clinton administration were saying the exact same things and making the exact same claims as the Bush administration, the only difference is W actually did something about it.

 

Under false pretenses. Which makes us the bad guy. "Hey, uh, we're taking over because... Uh, well, f*** IT! Because we can. You guys got something bad and we're going to find it after we take over..." Show me the WMD's, I don't care about corpses in the desert that we knew about beforehand anyways.

 

 

There is no way the Bush Administration pulled this out of their ass in order for the country to go to war. To gain WHAT? Yeah, I'm sure we're going to set up our very own oil pumps there shortly.

 

I completely understand being against the war, I was for a time a proponent of it, though no longer - but to make accusations that the Administration fabricated their intelligence to go to war with Iraq, that is just plain stupid.

 

Some of you people need to evaluate whether or not the nature of your disagreements with President Bush are your own thinking.

 

 

i still maintain it was largely due to him finishing daddy's job....why else would he have been planning this before even taking office.

 

If you think he wanted this for his own personal reasons, it makes PERFECT sense that he'd do it shortly before beginning his reelection campaign.

 

Yeah, right.

it does.

 

he thought it was going to be a simple job. 6 months AT MOST.

 

Take the momentum from that victory into the 2k4 election and win in a landslide.

 

Actually, any president who can rerun during the time of war have an advantage because a lot of people don't think it's a good idea to switch administrations mid-war. I saw an interesting interview with Jimmy Carter where he talked about this. For what it was, it was kind of informative.

 

And I'd kind of agree with that. If you bring in a new administration, especially one who's just saying they want to pull the troops out, then "1, 2, 3, 4--what did we fight for?"

Actually, any president who can rerun during the time of war have an advantage because a lot of people don't think it's a good idea to switch administrations mid-war. I saw an interesting interview with Jimmy Carter where he talked about this. For what it was, it was kind of informative.

 

And I'd kind of agree with that. If you bring in a new administration, especially one who's just saying they want to pull the troops out, then "1, 2, 3, 4--what did we fight for?"

 

 

Agreed. I don't think he did it for that reason, but the U.S. wasn't going to vote a president out of office in the middle of a war.

 

And maybe Clinton and every other nation didn't act because although they thought the same things were true, they didn't feel the evidence was strong enough to sacrifice a few thousand U.S. lives over. Don't know if that's true, just a thought. Some of you keep saying "But the rest of the world all had the same intelligence & thought the same thing!" Yeah but they didn't go storming in based on that intelligence either. So that tells me they didn't feel as strongly about it as you all seem to think. It sure wasn't Saddam who was frightening them off.

 

Maybe by storming in with guns-a-blazing Bush was trying to show that the U.S. would act where others were hesitant.

 

War should be a last resort, and Bush has demonstrated why.

But we had such a good topic going before.

 

Damn war.

Sure going to war with Iraq was a great humatarian thing and will help the region prosper in future.....until the oil runs out and the region turns into Africa. Hopefully the administration focuses more on building a democracy that will be able to sustain itself long term and less on making the government as pro-American as possible.

Wow, so now we are a liberation army!

 

 

Hear that world, you live in an area with a horrible dictator....We are coming to free you!!!!

 

 

oops.

ya and this administration has further drowned us into more debt then ever and caused many unnecessary deaths.

 

 

Ooo OooO!

 

 

 

RED HERRING!

Actually he would have to be responding to someone's point to use a red herring. It sucks that some of you have to take shots at the way I make a point on a political discussion thread.

ya and this administration has further drowned us into more debt then ever and caused many unnecessary deaths.

 

 

Ooo OooO!

 

 

 

RED HERRING!

Actually he would have to be responding to someone's point to use a red herring. It sucks that some of you have to take shots at the way I make a point on a political discussion thread.

 

I was poknig some mother fukcing fun god dammit and it was a read heaerring!

 

Happy new yaer!

ya and this administration has further drowned us into more debt then ever and caused many unnecessary deaths.

 

 

Ooo OooO!

 

 

 

RED HERRING!

Actually he would have to be responding to someone's point to use a red herring. It sucks that some of you have to take shots at the way I make a point on a political discussion thread.

 

I was poknig some mother fukcing fun god dammit and it was a read heaerring!

 

Happy new yaer!

You hurt my feelings. Youre blacklisted for the rest of the year! :mischief

Happy new year to you too.