Congratulations, Barack! :salute:
Changing from a Socialist to a Monarchist is a big step, but accomplishing what Joshua Norton couldn't, is more than remarkable!

It's disgusting how the President has hundreds of armed people to protect him, while the American people only have the largest and most well armed military in the world which swore an oath to protect them :nope:

EDIT: Oh crap, more gun-control debate :doh:

It should be noted that the President can sign a treaty but only a super-majority of the Senate can ratify it. The only exception is for what is called a Congressional-Executive Agreement which requires a simple majority from both houses.

Technically, the Senate does not ratify a treaty, they vote to approve a resolution of ratification, but let's not quibble. :D. The take-away is that it is the Senate that does it, not the President.

It is not uncommon for the US to sign but not ratify treaties. The United States, being one of many ratifying type governments is not legally bound by a treaty, as defined by the Vienna Convention on Treaties, until the treaty is ratified by a super majority of the US Senate.

Why would the United States sign a treaty but not ratify it?

To show support and to indicate general intent not to break the treaty (which is subtly different from a general intent to abide by the treaty), but at the same time, the United States wants to maintain the full authority of sovereignty in the context of being able to take action not in accordance with the treaty is the situation calls for it.

The United States does not have to either ratify or not ratify a treaty. In typical international policy weaseling, the US can ratify with reservations, which is an international way of crossing one's governmental fingers. :yep:

There are 22 treaties that US Presidents have signed and the Senate has not, and is not expected to ratify. The earliest one is from 1825. I think the Senate has had long enough to make their decision. :D

Some of the more current ones that ain't ratified

World court
Law of the Sea Convention
Montreal Aviation Protocols
Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Contrary to the belief of some -- not a conspiracy. Just a normal way of doing business international policy wise.

A thought to ponder: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;...

OK, that's how you make a treaty, but who has the power to end one?

The Constitution is strangely silent on that one. :hmmm:

We have terminated three treaties (let's not talk about violating treaties!) Two of them were terminated by the President (one unilaterally and one with congressional consent); Only one treaty was terminated solely by a joint resolution of congress -- A mutual defense treaty with France in 1789.

Wrong, this treaty will be used as a "back door" method to infringe on the constitution.Then they can say "well we are bound by a treaty" etc No stupid treaty passed by the useless body known as the UN will stop illicit arms trade.This is just another power grab and attempt to circumvent the constitutional right to which american citizens are entitled.

Well, if opposing this treaty puts me on the side of Iran, NK, Syria while preserving our rights at home, absolutely.What is happening in Syria is none of our business anyways..No stupid treaty will actually stop the distribution of weapons.However, this will be used to usurp the constitution.Like Ducimus said, the Obamas, Bloombergs, Feinsteins etc work in increments, with this binding us, they would gladly use it as an excuse for their tyrannical agenda.

There is no one world that defines him anymore.Much of his beliefs and attitudes are rooted in marxism, that is who he is at heart. Now, that he is President, his disposition and actions are much that of a dictator, he is a statist but marxism is where his heart is.Anyway who has studied this man's life long enough can see that, read his books, look into his life, who his associates are, things he has said, his actions etc Easy to see, really..How he acts, is as if the man sees himself as a king, an emperor of sorts.I use the term Emperor to describe him as that is what he acts like, more than a president.

Anything to do with the UN that we sign, erodes our sovereignty little by little, sometimes, in large amounts. Signing such a document would be used by those in power in our country as an excuse to circumvent the US constitution, which is the supreme law of the land but they would use it as an excuse. The UN is a useless body that we should have no part of, all the money we wasted on that useless body, could be used for better purposes.

Hey, you Americans formed it :)

While you are correct that the UN is pretty darn useless, the treaty does not "erode our sovereignty" at all. Specifically - let me point out this part.....

That isn't a problem with the treaty or the UN - that is a problem with the crappy politicians we have in Washington. Focus on the problem - and don't let them use it as an excuse.

With that said, point to a specific line/sentence/article that erodes the sovereign authority of the US as a nation. As I said - if you can I will consider it - but if you can't and you make the claim that it does so - your just venting your spleen for no cause.

Exactly, you are don't get it because you don't live here.

The people currently in charge wish to disarm the public because it is much easier to control the population. There are many things they wish they could implement that simply will not be tolerated when have such a large part of the population that is armed. They know they can only push so far with things they way they are, with so many liberty minded people who are entitled to be armed.They know they can't get away with confiscation and have yet been able to get the tyrannical gun laws they want through, so they seek other means, even if in increments.

Sadly, the roughly 50% of gullible idiots in our population fall for their "we do this to prevent crime and mass murder" line when it is all about one thing, CONTROL.

The whole reason the second amendment was put in place was exactly for as it is functioning and has for many year, to keep the government in check.The founders knew the nature of men, the nature of governments, history repeats itself, that is why the the second amendment is there, to ensure that citizens have the means to defend themselves should that time come.Also, to make sure those who seek to violate the rights of the citizens know they will have an armed populace to deal with should they chose to engage in tyranny.Judging from your comment, you are a not an American, so would not understand but perhaps you will get it.

Sadly, we did ,and should disband it.

No, that man acts like an Emperor instead of a President, so I call him that, I have many other names for him.Really, it is my choice.Extreme bias? No. I see that piece of crap for what he is and am not shy about it. Should he actually do something decent, in line with the constitution, with the best interests of this country, I would be all for it but he does the complete opposite.

:down:

This is easily one of the most tired and used-up arguments here in GT.

The non-Americans in this thread are doing a lot better than the thread starter as far as reasonable and grounded discussion goes.


Your definition of a dictator is in need of calibration.

I think WND is leaking.

The "You are not an American" is a completely valid argument.The cultures are very different and the poster said he did not get what he called the "paranoia" so I explained why so many are up in arms about the actions of our government.The US has been for a long time, the last bastion of liberty on the planet basically.There are those within the power structure of this country, in both major parties, who seek to maximize their power and achieve their agenda in order to make things better, well better as they see it.The respect for individual rights is not seen as a priority but rather the collective.This does include usurping the constitution which is and always has been a big inconvenience for these types, which is why they push the "living constitution" theory to try give their absurd notions so constitutional legitimacy, its smoke and mirrors and does not always work, sadly so many in our nation are just idiots and do not know any better. The one thing that gives the constitution teeth is the second amendment.The obama types out there HATE this, which is why instead of respect the constitution, they try to circumvent it etc and hope that in increments, over time, they can achieve their goals.

Dictator is an accurate term for obama.The use of "executive power" , his willingness to bypass the legislative branch, ignore the constitution, push his agenda etc, do what he wants certainly fits the bill of a dictator, he has the attitude of one. I'm not making this up, just examine the man's actions, read into his life etc, not difficult to do really.

:har: if you had so much liberty, why did you only ever have two political parties?