Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:21 AM
 
1,777 posts, read 1,403,103 times
Reputation: 589

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
My whole arguement is that his move was Illegal and Unconstitutional. which is fact.

Just like the CEO of Pepsi can't be the CEO of Coke for a day.
But the CEO of Pepsi could chair a meeting of the National Council of Soft Drink Manufacturers, of which both Coke and Pepsi were members, without causing a gross conflict of interest, correct?

All you're doing is repeating yourself and quoting the Constitution, which does not say what you think (or wish) it was saying in this case. Mindless repetition does not make your argument any stronger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:21 AM
 
616 posts, read 854,556 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
Einstein and I never disagreed. According to our Constitution, any treat we sign is as binding as any other federal law we pass. But International Law works differently. The UN does not have the power to force countries to comply with the agreements they sign. There is no enforcement power in the international arena that can make a country abide by its agreements. Economic sanctions and calls for other countries to penalize a nation are the extent of the UN's power to force a country to uphold an agreement. It makes us look bad on the world stage if we back out of them, and could have ramifications for violating our Constitution, but the UN can't do anything about it since it's not a Sovereign nation.
You say the UN has no power yet when war breaks out in a country we have nothing to do with, the UN wants us to help out? and we do it? I don't get that. is America really Soveriegn if we do what a "council" in a foregin country says do?

Forget "making us look bad", so our country has to go down the drain because we don't wanna "look bad"?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
I have. It's Unconstitutional. been saying that since post one. And you've presented nothing to show that it's not Unconstitutional and why he even had to do it in the first place. it's the arrogant Obamabots that urk me the most. Not just Obama himself.
And you can make it a "till death do us part" argument and it still won't become valid. If you've got an actual argument worth wasting time on, bring it on. Wishful thinking is better kept to self.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:27 AM
 
616 posts, read 854,556 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by bc42gb43 View Post
But the CEO of Pepsi could chair a meeting of the National Council of Soft Drink Manufacturers, of which both Coke and Pepsi were members, without causing a gross conflict of interest, correct?
to the detrement of his own insder info, he can do what he wants. same as Obama did. "forget the Constitution, I wanna slam the gavel..heeheeewheeew!" like a big kid.

Quote:
All you're doing is repeating yourself and quoting the Constitution, which does not say what you think (or wish) it was saying in this case. Mindless repetition does not make your argument any stronger.
I've said what I wanted repeatedly, can you read? It was an Illegal and Unconstitutional move he made and the American people didn't call him on it.

you can spin it how you want, it was not right. Obama knows it. do you?

He's a lawyer, he knows it was wrong.

and again, you failed to answer my question: WHY did he even need to do it in the first place? Don't he delegate somebody for that?


Dodging questions is worse than mindless repetition. touche'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:29 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,774,139 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
I have. It's Unconstitutional. been saying that since post one. And you've presented nothing to show that it's not Unconstitutional and why he even had to do it in the first place. it's the arrogant Obamabots that urk me the most. Not just Obama himself.
We've repeated many times why it's not Unconstitutional. The UN is not a foreign or sovereign nation. It's an organization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:32 AM
 
616 posts, read 854,556 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
And you can make it a "till death do us part" argument and it still won't become valid. If you've got an actual argument worth wasting time on, bring it on. Wishful thinking is better kept to self.
If you think for a second the United States and the United Nations are one entitiy, you got a lot of study to do.

You do agree, that the United Nations is a foreign entity right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:33 AM
 
616 posts, read 854,556 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
We've repeated many times why it's not Unconstitutional. The UN is not a foreign or sovereign nation. It's an organization.
If it controls the actions of America in every eay, it's much more than just an "Organization"..

try again. I'm listening.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:33 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,774,139 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
You say the UN has no power yet when war breaks out in a country we have nothing to do with, the UN wants us to help out? and we do it?
Um, you kinda just proved my point. The United Nations can't stop a war that breaks out - it has no military power. So it might ask for help from its founding members. The United States is one of them, and has the largest military. Therefore the UN might ask us to help in an international crisis.

Quote:
I don't get that. is America really Soveriegn if we do what a "council" in a foregin country says do?
Yes, because the United Nations isn't forcing us to do it.

Quote:
Forget "making us look bad", so our country has to go down the drain because we don't wanna "look bad"?????
Can you show me where we are required to do anything the United Nations asks us to do? This is no different than the Prime Minister of England calling up Obama and saying, hey, seeing as we're allies and all, we could use your help in this matter. Obama can say sure, the US will help you, or he can say, sorry, we can't afford the commitment.

Since when is a request a destruction of sovereignty?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:36 AM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,774,139 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
If it controls the actions of America in every eay, it's much more than just an "Organization"..

try again. I'm listening.
It doesn't control our actions. As one of the permanent member states, and the largest power in the United Nations, if anything, we control the UN. Not the other way around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2011, 11:36 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by 512ATX View Post
It's called making a comparison. have you seen it yet? have you seen the CEO of Pepsi take the seat of CEO at Coke for a day just of giggles and grins? sounds stupid don't it? it is stupid. and so is Obama chairing the UN Security council when his behind belongs in Washington taking care of US Business and not trying to grandstand for the UN
Since the United States is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and I would think it's most prominent and influential member, I would think that our activities in the Council are a matter of United States' business. Or are you arguing that nothing the Security Council is involved in is the business of the United States?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top