Some Euros Think They Should Be Able To Vote In US Elections

[Annie]

Oh man!

Not my favorite site, but at least they are translating:

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2825

Liberal Europeans Demand Right to Vote in U.S. Elections
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Thu, 2008-01-03 11:45

A quote from the editorial in the Brussels newspaper De Standaard, 3 January 2008

American presidential elections are not “home affairs.” American decisions have repercussions all over the globe. The American mortgage crisis affects banks in Europe. The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich. The American refusal to care for the environment causes the North Pole ice to melt and coastal areas in Asia to flood. A weakened dollar and an immense budget deficit affect the global economy.

Hence, the world should be given the right to vote. Because the current situation is a blatant case of taxation without representation, against which the Americans rebelled in 1776. But of course the world will not be allowed to vote. The best we can hope for is that the Americans choose a leader who is deeply aware of the U.S.’s responsibility, as a superpower, for the rest of mankind.

The international community was able to limit America’s hegemony somewhat through organisations for international consultation, agreements and the corresponding judicial apparatus. But that system is in crisis, partly through the actions of the current American president.

Wow they admit to the reason for ICC. I thank them for reminding me of at least one reason I shouldn't hate Bush.

 

[Toro]

That's pretty ridiculous.

My guess is that the vast majority of Europeans do not think they should be allowed to vote in US elections.

 

[Annie]

That's pretty ridiculous.

My guess is that the vast majority of Europeans do not think they should be allowed to vote in US elections.

But I bet a significant number of their elites do. As stated, it's part of the reason they wish to tangle the US in international organizations.

 

[Toro]

But I bet a significant number of their elites do. As stated, it's part of the reason they wish to tangle the US in international organizations.

No, I'm pretty sure that they don't believe they should be able to vote in US elections. Do you really think that they believe 8 million Belgians should vote in American elections whereas 300 million Americans shouldn't be able to vote in Belgian elections? A few screwballs may think that, but everyone else doesn't.

But yes you are correct in that it is generally in the best interests of the rest of the world to have the most powerful nation sign treaties and abide by the rule of international law.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, I'm pretty sure that they don't believe they should be able to vote in US elections. Do you really think that they believe 8 million Belgians should vote in American elections whereas 300 million Americans shouldn't be able to vote in Belgian elections? A few screwballs may think that, but everyone else doesn't.

But yes you are correct in that it is generally in the best interests of the rest of the world to have the most powerful nation sign treaties and abide by the rule of international law.

Ya, just cause Britain tried the same shit in 2004, no one in Europe thinks they should tell us what to do.

My response is simple, they want a vote? They join our country and live under OUR Government.

 

[Toro]

Ya, just cause Britain tried the same shit in 2004, no one in Europe thinks they should tell us what to do.

My response is simple, they want a vote? They join our country and live under OUR Government.

Of course. It's moronic to think otherwise.

 

[Annie]

No, I'm pretty sure that they don't believe they should be able to vote in US elections. Do you really think that they believe 8 million Belgians should vote in American elections whereas 300 million Americans shouldn't be able to vote in Belgian elections? A few screwballs may think that, but everyone else doesn't.

But yes you are correct in that it is generally in the best interests of the rest of the world to have the most powerful nation sign treaties and abide by the rule of international law.

I said, 'significant number' of 'elites', not 8 million Belgians. Actually what many from other countries see at 'their best interests' in keeping us under control, may not be in our best interest or in actuality, even theirs.

I really do think we should NOT go along with ICC and do think we need out of UN.

 

[doniston]

Oh man!

Not my favorite site, but at least they are translating:

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2825



Wow they admit to the reason for ICC. I thank them for reminding me of at least one reason I shouldn't hate Bush.

Their reasons are logical, of course their demands are not. but then again, we shouldn't be interfering with other nations elections either.

 

[Toro]

I said, 'significant number' of 'elites', not 8 million Belgians. Actually what many from other countries see at 'their best interests' in keeping us under control, may not be in our best interest or in actuality, even theirs.

I really do think we should NOT go along with ICC and do think we need out of UN.

I was positing the opinion from the few elites who would argue they should vote in American elections. Turn the tables on them that Americans should vote in their elections, and I think most people would disagree.

America should stay in the UN but should not be a part of the ICC.

 

[Annie]

I was positing the opinion from the few elites who would argue they should vote in American elections. Turn the tables on them that Americans should vote in their elections, and I think most people would disagree.

America should stay in the UN but should not be a part of the ICC.

I agree with the first part, something like, "When the rest of the world can join in your elections, we'll consider it."

As for the above of yours I bolded, you're halfway there.

 

[Toro]

Its in America's interest to stay in the UN. The UN is a bloated corrupt institution - a friend of mine worked at the UN in New York for a year and she said the bureaucracy was unlike anything she'd seen - but it is easier for America to get things done internationally through such a formal institution.

 

[Annie]

Its in America's interest to stay in the UN. The UN is a bloated corrupt institution - a friend of mine worked at the UN in New York for a year and she said the bureaucracy was unlike anything she'd seen - but it is easier for America to get things done internationally through such a formal institution.

I did an internship with UNESCO out of college, it was true even in the 70's, being corrupt and a horrendous bureaucracy. I don't see how the second clause follows the truth of the first.

The US government is a horrendous bureaucracy also, but if one knows the system, you can get help to go through it. Not so with the UN, the only power is at the top and they are not accessible.

Get them out of US or make them pay Manhattan prices; and not with our dues. Get rid of the diplomatic cover, diplomats need to work at their embassies.

 

[watermark]

Oh man!

Not my favorite site, but at least they are translating:





Wow they admit to the reason for ICC. I thank them for reminding me of at least one reason I shouldn't hate Bush.

Dear Kathy,

I really believe this is fearmongering, but that was elitist, true.

Love, WM

 

[no1tovote4]

Seriously elitist. How very sad.

 

[Annie]

Dear Kathy,

I really believe this is fearmongering, but that was elitist, true.

Love, WM

Fear mongering? Did I miss something?

 

[tigerbob]

Ya, just cause Britain tried the same shit in 2004, no one in Europe thinks they should tell us what to do.

My response is simple, they want a vote? They join our country and live under OUR Government.

What did Britain do in 2004? (I guess I ought to know about this).

 

[dawks2020]

This should never be allowed, and we our country should never allow dual citizenship; you cannot defend two different constitutions at the same time.

Regarding the UN, the UN is not a democratic organization. We are a democratic republic, therefore the UN is not aligned with US principles and we should not subscribe to the organization. I especially am opposed to the Unites States political and military involvement in UN resolutions.

We have to realize that committing military and political to UN resolutions destroy US credibility and instills hatred. Economic sanctions are particularly devastating to innocent civilians, and only instill hatred for countries partaking in those sanctions. Think about this way, who do you think suffers more in Iran from sanctions such as food trade restrictions, the political leaders or the average civilian? We have to understand that this leads to greater suffering and destabilization and that US involvement in the UN does not help the world.

A note about UNESCO, since the adoption of UNESCO in American education; education standards and scores compared to other countries has greatly slipped. Our government should reconsider UNESCO and take the responsibility of education ourselves (meaning our own government local, state, fed should figure it out).

 

[Alucard]

Its in America's interest to stay in the UN. The UN is a bloated corrupt institution - a friend of mine worked at the UN in New York for a year and she said the bureaucracy was unlike anything she'd seen - but it is easier for America to get things done internationally through such a formal institution.

Thats exactly why we should tell the UN to go screw themselves