you are kidding right? I think you are maybe. Maybe you are playing a little joke?
WE (the U.S.) belong to and have always been intricle to both.
the U.N. was first pushed by president wilson and became the failed league of nations(the U.N. prototype. It failed b/c no one took it seriously.
the U.N. is the second iteration of the League of nations and the U.S. is one of the Five countries that has overall veto.
The U.S. Created and leads NATO which was created to counteract the warsaw pact (a coalition of communist countries lead be the U.S.S.R that does not like the U.S.S.R. exist any longer.)
seems I am. But I think the joke is on me. I was confusing United Nations with the European Union. Sorry
I do stuff like that all the time.
don't worry man it happens.
U.S. is one of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. That is a thing to remember when there is a clamor for dropping the membership. In the current environment, that is a privilage we would never get back.
I don't know what the big deal is. America and Israel have always ignored the UN. So who cares what they propose.
no...the US has one of the 5 UN hidden vetos.
See......i told my fiance that we wouldn't let it happen.....but he brought up a frog analogy.
If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will jump out.
If you put a frog into a pot of water, and heat it up slowly, it will not notice until it boils to death.....
hyper426 wrote:no...the US has one of the 5 UN hidden vetos.
See......i told my fiance that we wouldn't let it happen.....but he brought up a frog analogy.
If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will jump out.
If you put a frog into a pot of water, and heat it up slowly, it will not notice until it boils to death.....
Have you actually done this?
nice......no......but i have wondered about the morality of testing this....
wait......my fiance just told me saw it done......in High School Biology
hehe...im the she, fiance= he, so more likely he did do it and didn't want to tell me he did it himself....
anyways......
the point of that was just to say that slow, subtle oppression is more likely to go unnoticed, so therefore, how can we rule out the possiblility that our government, if not the UN, may try to "protect" America by slowly making owning firarms illegal. Is this not already occurring? Culture and economics are also tools used to fuel this slow oppression. If i tell anyone that I have access to a firearm, be it a .22 pistol or an AK-47, I will, on the majority of occassions, be given a bad look and reputation as an automatic troublemaker. Americans may still believe we HAVE the right, but that mindset is slowly dissipating in the wake of American culture.
Guns have never been legal down here. I think it's the stupidest thing that America ever did. And no, you Americans love your guns to much for them to be banned.
How does banning handguns have anything to do with our rights against the government.
If you are worried about the government taking over (whatever that means), handguns aren't going to help you.
If they start banning the private ownership of Tanks... that's when you should start worrying.
can we currently own tanks?
