Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos
I am not saying the UN would be forcing anyone into a new constitution. I am saying that eventually, the current membership of the UN will realize the ineffectiveness of the current confederation and may want to establish a more perfect Union.
|
Except that the UN is NOT a Confederation. It is not a form of government in any way, shape, or form. Nor was it ever intended to be. If they choose to go ahead with such a concept, they can do it without the United States.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos
The current UN does not have any more power over the several state than the US under the AoC, and could be seen as a valid reason for a better constitution.
|
Wrong. The AoC established a federal government, and bound the states into a perpetual Union. The UN charter does nothing of the sort. The AoC had more power over the states than the UN has over its member states (which is none at all).
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos
The Iraqis also voted for their previous leader. It could have been interpreted as positive gesture for greater democracy from dictatorship, without the need to import any more democracy from the US.
|
You are honestly trying to tell me the elections held under Saddam were anything other than a sham?
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos
Do you really want an initial, powerful central government? I think the US, with its separation of powers and form of federalism, has already proved that central governments will always encroach on the sovereignty of the several states over time.
|
No, I don't want a powerful central government. I want a government that fulfills its obligations as laid out in the Constitution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos
A hypothetical US style Constitution would still give the several states great latitude in dealing with their current problems. The only difference would be, that in a generation or two, the UN could simply send the UN ATF to Baghdad to solve a minor problem instead of resorting to the sort of anarchy we are using now.
|
The big problem I see with your hypothetical "World Constitution" is the fact that different people around the world have different ideas on what role federal government should have in their lives. I would not, and nor would America, agree to any form of constitution that takes away the rights I currently hold. For example, do you honestly see the rest of the world agreeing with our 2nd Amendment? Or our 1st for that matter?