US Values or National Interests?

[georgephillip]

Is the Fourth about celebrating US values like human rights, or has the US "consistently chosen national interests over rights?"

"Michael Barnett is a professor of international affairs and political science at George Washington University. He is the author, most recently, of 'The Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism.'

"(CNN) -- Independence Day is a celebration not just of America's independence, but also of the values that are important to our nation, like liberty, democracy and human rights..."

The professor begins his short essay by dismissing President Carter's concern that the US should be a little less "self-congratulatory and a little more self-critical" when it comes to evaluating the "moral leadership" it provides to the rest of the world.

"Even in better days, the United States has often made rotten compromises in the name of security. Simply put, the United States has championed human rights when it sees no damage to its security and economic interests. But when human rights are perceived as potentially detrimental to national interests, the United States has consistently chosen interests over values."

Simple enough?
If not, consider spending Labor Day in Afghanistan or Honduras.

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

 

[uscitizen]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

 

[Intense]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

In many ways we are. In the Recognition of Unalienable Rights, for one. In International Disaster Relief and Aid for two. Ethics, Morals, are Individual Strengths, as well as National, or Government. Get over your bitterness, it is blinding you.

 

[uscitizen]

I just do not wear partisan blinders and see more than you do.

 

[georgephillip]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

This seems to be a recurring pattern since the end of WWII (at least)

"Noam Chomsky has pointed out that this year we are failing to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of what he calls 'President John F. Kennedy's decision to launch the most destructive and murderous act of aggression of the post-World War II period: the invasion of South Vietnam...' Indeed, it was in 1962 that U.S. armed forces began to bomb South Vietnam, but this is a non-event in the public consciousness of the West..."

Vol 19 number 10 Text Version

Who's next?
My guess is Mexico.

 

[Intense]

I just do not wear partisan blinders and see more than you do.

You assume a lot. Maybe that is the root of your problem.

 

[georgephillip]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

In many ways we are. In the Recognition of Unalienable Rights, for one. In International Disaster Relief and Aid for two. Ethics, Morals, are Individual Strengths, as well as National, or Government. Get over your bitterness, it is blinding you.

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

 

[Intense]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

This seems to be a recurring pattern since the end of WWII (at least)

"Noam Chomsky has pointed out that this year we are failing to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of what he calls 'President John F. Kennedy's decision to launch the most destructive and murderous act of aggression of the post-World War II period: the invasion of South Vietnam...' Indeed, it was in 1962 that U.S. armed forces began to bomb South Vietnam, but this is a non-event in the public consciousness of the West..."

Vol 19 number 10 Text Version

Who's next?
My guess is Mexico.

I don't think so, though if Civil War did break out there, Political Asylum would take care of a big chunk of the Illegal Immigration Problem you are both in denial of. I'd support Cancun, Baja, and the Yucatan, as the 51-52-53rd States after the dust settles. We might as well have something to show for our troubles.

Personally I think the next front will be Iran, and No, I do not like the Idea. To me Personally, the Failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, lie in the realization that Their Respective Constitutions do not Promote Unalienable Rights, Human Rights, Access to Justice for Male, Female, Believer, and Non-Believer, alike. That's the failure, the rest is spin.

 

[Intense]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

In many ways we are. In the Recognition of Unalienable Rights, for one. In International Disaster Relief and Aid for two. Ethics, Morals, are Individual Strengths, as well as National, or Government. Get over your bitterness, it is blinding you.

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

Good Works Always Trump Bad Behavior and misguided action.
Obama has not Championed Individual Rights. What is wrong with you, that you would even think of subjecting us to Arbitrary rule of the International Criminal Court. Are you really that stupid? One World Centralized Government Control? Why not just plainly state how much you detest the Constitution? Who runs the UN? Dictators or Humanitarians? Open up your eyes.

 

[georgephillip]

America the moral leader of the world?
Gimme a break!
The military leader of the world now is correct.

We have supported many dictators and not picked on many countrys for hujman rights abuses and even supported those doing the abuses.

This seems to be a recurring pattern since the end of WWII (at least)

"Noam Chomsky has pointed out that this year we are failing to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of what he calls 'President John F. Kennedy's decision to launch the most destructive and murderous act of aggression of the post-World War II period: the invasion of South Vietnam...' Indeed, it was in 1962 that U.S. armed forces began to bomb South Vietnam, but this is a non-event in the public consciousness of the West..."

Vol 19 number 10 Text Version

Who's next?
My guess is Mexico.

I don't think so, though if Civil War did break out there, Political Asylum would take care of a big chunk of the Illegal Immigration Problem you are both in denial of. I'd support Cancun, Baja, and the Yucatan, as the 51-52-53rd States after the dust settles. We might as well have something to show for our troubles.

Personally I think the next front will be Iran, and No, I do not like the Idea. To me Personally, the Failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, lie in the realization that Their Respective Constitutions do not Promote Unalienable Rights, Human Rights, Access to Justice for Male, Female, Believer, and Non-Believer, alike. That's the failure, the rest is spin.

If this economy CRASHES as loudly as some are expecting, the US won't be able to borrow enough money to wage war on the opposite side of the world. I hadn't thought of the possibility of a Mexican Civil War, but Fast and Furious seems to be setting the stage for US intervention.

For years I've though Baja would make a natural addition to California; however, most people I've spoken to about this from both sides of the border don't seem inclined to vote in favor.

 

[The T]

In many ways we are. In the Recognition of Unalienable Rights, for one. In International Disaster Relief and Aid for two. Ethics, Morals, are Individual Strengths, as well as National, or Government. Get over your bitterness, it is blinding you.

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

Good Works Always Trump Bad Behavior and misguided action.
Obama has not Championed Individual Rights. What is wrong with you, that you would even think of subjecting us to Arbitrary rule of the International Criminal Court. Are you really that stupid? One World Centralized Government Control? Why not just plainly state how much you detest the Constitution? Who runs the UN? Dictators or Humanitarians? Open up your eyes.

Not to mention lack of understanding for the need of Soverignty?

 

[Intense]

Why Trash the USA on the 4th of July? Pretty low.

 

[Intense]

This seems to be a recurring pattern since the end of WWII (at least)

"Noam Chomsky has pointed out that this year we are failing to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of what he calls 'President John F. Kennedy's decision to launch the most destructive and murderous act of aggression of the post-World War II period: the invasion of South Vietnam...' Indeed, it was in 1962 that U.S. armed forces began to bomb South Vietnam, but this is a non-event in the public consciousness of the West..."

Vol 19 number 10 Text Version

Who's next?
My guess is Mexico.

I don't think so, though if Civil War did break out there, Political Asylum would take care of a big chunk of the Illegal Immigration Problem you are both in denial of. I'd support Cancun, Baja, and the Yucatan, as the 51-52-53rd States after the dust settles. We might as well have something to show for our troubles.

Personally I think the next front will be Iran, and No, I do not like the Idea. To me Personally, the Failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, lie in the realization that Their Respective Constitutions do not Promote Unalienable Rights, Human Rights, Access to Justice for Male, Female, Believer, and Non-Believer, alike. That's the failure, the rest is spin.

If this economy CRASHES as loudly as some are expecting, the US won't be able to borrow enough money to wage war on the opposite side of the world. I hadn't thought of the possibility of a Mexican Civil War, but Fast and Furious seems to be setting the stage for US intervention.

For years I've though Baja would make a natural addition to California; however, most people I've spoken to about this from both sides of the border don't seem inclined to vote in favor.

You better check out Obama's Executive Order that claims control over all personal Assets, including our time and Labor. Were you too busy to notice that, Comrade?

 

[georgephillip]

In many ways we are. In the Recognition of Unalienable Rights, for one. In International Disaster Relief and Aid for two. Ethics, Morals, are Individual Strengths, as well as National, or Government. Get over your bitterness, it is blinding you.

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

Good Works Always Trump Bad Behavior and misguided action.
Obama has not Championed Individual Rights. What is wrong with you, that you would even think of subjecting us to Arbitrary rule of the International Criminal Court. Are you really that stupid? One World Centralized Government Control? Why not just plainly state how much you detest the Constitution? Who runs the UN? Dictators or Humanitarians? Open up your eyes.

What does the Constitution say about an Imperial Presidency or the Divine Right of Superpowers?

"Henry Kissinger described the Bush doctrine as 'revolutionary,' pointing out that it undermines the 17th century Westphalian system of international order, and of course the UN Charter and international law.

"He approved of the doctrine but with reservations about style and tactics, and with a crucial qualification: it cannot be 'a universal principle available to every nation.' Rather, the right of aggression must be reserved to the US, perhaps delegated to chosen clients.

"We must forcefully reject the principle of universality: that we apply to ourselves the same standards we do to others, more stringent ones if we are serious.

"Kissinger is to be praised for his honesty in forthrightly articulating prevailing doctrine, usually concealed in professions of virtuous intent and tortured legalisms. And he understands his educated audience. As he doubtless expected, there was no reaction."

Imperial Presidency, by Noam Chomsky

 

[Charles_Main]

Is the Fourth about celebrating US values like human rights, or has the US "consistently chosen national interests over rights?"

"Michael Barnett is a professor of international affairs and political science at George Washington University. He is the author, most recently, of 'The Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism.'

"(CNN) -- Independence Day is a celebration not just of America's independence, but also of the values that are important to our nation, like liberty, democracy and human rights..."

The professor begins his short essay by dismissing President Carter's concern that the US should be a little less "self-congratulatory and a little more self-critical" when it comes to evaluating the "moral leadership" it provides to the rest of the world.

"Even in better days, the United States has often made rotten compromises in the name of security. Simply put, the United States has championed human rights when it sees no damage to its security and economic interests. But when human rights are perceived as potentially detrimental to national interests, the United States has consistently chosen interests over values."

Simple enough?
If not, consider spending Labor Day in Afghanistan or Honduras.

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

It's about celebrating the Birth of our Nation which allows you to have the Sort of Debate you want.

 

[dilloduck]

The International Committee of the Red Cross needs to stick with disaster relief and stay out of politics. They would indermine American sovereignty if they had their way. The American Red Cross has vowed to stay out of politics yet they are getting dangerously close to breaking it when they start teaching classes in America on International law.
We are already the worlds policemen. Do we have to be the moral leader too ?


Happy Sovereign Independence Day, America !

 

[georgephillip]

I don't think so, though if Civil War did break out there, Political Asylum would take care of a big chunk of the Illegal Immigration Problem you are both in denial of. I'd support Cancun, Baja, and the Yucatan, as the 51-52-53rd States after the dust settles. We might as well have something to show for our troubles.

Personally I think the next front will be Iran, and No, I do not like the Idea. To me Personally, the Failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, lie in the realization that Their Respective Constitutions do not Promote Unalienable Rights, Human Rights, Access to Justice for Male, Female, Believer, and Non-Believer, alike. That's the failure, the rest is spin.

If this economy CRASHES as loudly as some are expecting, the US won't be able to borrow enough money to wage war on the opposite side of the world. I hadn't thought of the possibility of a Mexican Civil War, but Fast and Furious seems to be setting the stage for US intervention.

For years I've though Baja would make a natural addition to California; however, most people I've spoken to about this from both sides of the border don't seem inclined to vote in favor.

You better check out Obama's Executive Order that claims control over all personal Assets, including our time and Labor. Were you too busy to notice that, Comrade?

Romney, Obama, Bush and Clinton, Carter, Reagan, LBJ and JFK etc., etc., all serve the same masters.
You can't roll back the creeping fascism in America by "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican in the voting booth. And it is getting late.

 

[Intense]

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

Good Works Always Trump Bad Behavior and misguided action.
Obama has not Championed Individual Rights. What is wrong with you, that you would even think of subjecting us to Arbitrary rule of the International Criminal Court. Are you really that stupid? One World Centralized Government Control? Why not just plainly state how much you detest the Constitution? Who runs the UN? Dictators or Humanitarians? Open up your eyes.

What does the Constitution say about an Imperial Presidency or the Divine Right of Superpowers?

"Henry Kissinger described the Bush doctrine as 'revolutionary,' pointing out that it undermines the 17th century Westphalian system of international order, and of course the UN Charter and international law.

"He approved of the doctrine but with reservations about style and tactics, and with a crucial qualification: it cannot be 'a universal principle available to every nation.' Rather, the right of aggression must be reserved to the US, perhaps delegated to chosen clients.

"We must forcefully reject the principle of universality: that we apply to ourselves the same standards we do to others, more stringent ones if we are serious.

"Kissinger is to be praised for his honesty in forthrightly articulating prevailing doctrine, usually concealed in professions of virtuous intent and tortured legalisms. And he understands his educated audience. As he doubtless expected, there was no reaction."

Imperial Presidency, by Noam Chomsky

Here is the bottom line. I'm one Person, One Vote, same foe each of us. There are compromises that none of us should be buying into, the ones that corrupt value and principle. When you let that be taken away, you've already lost. Our Nation is bigger than Our Government, bigger than the failed policies, which in many cases are not much different than the forces they are battling. Get it. So why support and enable those which wish us harm, when you can instead choose to effect positive change here?

Why would you reject a value or principle that in your heart you know to be true. We differ here. Two kinds of compromise. First, the one you seem to love so much, compromise of Principle. Translation, Corruption of Principle, Tainted Value. What end does that bring? You reap what you sow. Abomination is abomination, no matter how you dress it up.

Second kind of Compromise, Level or degree of action. Baby Steps. Sometimes one needs to start out small, and follow the effect, tailor and fine tune, based on circumstance, findings, need, ability. Federalism was at one time rooted in that. What get's proven advances to the next level. We do learn as we go, if we choose to.

Our Highest Law, Man Made Law, is the Constitution, not the UN Charter. How much brute force and big money do you think is behind the UN.

 

[uscitizen]

Why Trash the USA on the 4th of July? Pretty low.

Why is the 4th any different from any other day?

Ohh an anniversary thing. Nice programming there.

 

[georgephillip]

Do you believe America's human rights policies trump its counter-terrorism policies?
Apparently, Professor Barnett does:

"We have made good strides. In the last 10 years, the United States has been one of the largest supporters of the International Committee of the Red Cross, despite the fact that the Red Cross makes it a point to remind the United States and other governments of their commitments to international humanitarian law.

"The Obama administration has championed women's rights and reproductive health, children's rights, religious rights and other areas of central concern to the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

"And although the United States still refuses to become a full-fledged member of the International Criminal Court, it has begun to play a supporting role."

Is America the moral leader in the world? - CNN.com

Good Works Always Trump Bad Behavior and misguided action.
Obama has not Championed Individual Rights. What is wrong with you, that you would even think of subjecting us to Arbitrary rule of the International Criminal Court. Are you really that stupid? One World Centralized Government Control? Why not just plainly state how much you detest the Constitution? Who runs the UN? Dictators or Humanitarians? Open up your eyes.

Not to mention lack of understanding for the need of Soverignty?

Do you see any evidence of corporations eclipsing national sovereignty?

"Consumer groups and unions are particularly outraged over the Obama administration’s plan that would allow corporations from TPP countries to bring suit before a multinational tribunal when laws or regulations in another member country harm their profits.

"Tucker warns that such language means that an individual company 'that’s not necessarily pursuing the national interest as a whole can attack environmental regulations without first having to go through any kind of diplomatic process.'

"He notes that 'We’ve seen over $300 million paid out to investors as a result of NAFTA cases' challenging environmental and financial regulation.

"Tucker gave the example of a Mexican municipality forced to pay $15 million to a U.S. investor who had bought a landfill that was being subjected to regulation. Tucker said companies are also 'using it preemptively to cast a chill on regulation that might be coming down the pike.'”

The Labor Movement - Salon.com