International Aviation

[insp89]

No, see, he's not an antiglobalist. He's an anti-"Globalist." 🙄.....BTW, diogenes brings up a good example of what this country can expect in the near future. Mexican trucks not meeting safety standards on U.S. roads, and "Dolphin-friendly only Tuna.

weiss, ......If you want to label me a anti-"Globalist", I will have to label you a "Globalist" 😛h34r: 🙄 BTW, diogenes brings up some good examples of what this country can expect to see,,Mexican trucks not meeting saftey standards on U.S. roads, and Dolphin -friendly tuna. I would like to hear your "Globalistic response.....

 

[diogenes]

Of course they will. And US economic interests will frequently collide with other countries' laws. And Arizona economic interests will collide with California's laws. So? That's part of the nature of trade.

US law dictates that treaties are to be given equal consideration to the Constitution; "must" or not, that's how it is. And it makes sense; the contract is between Congress and another nation.

Hello, Michael, let me clarify.

I am all for agreements and treaties. Isolationism, and extreme fundamentalism, begat the radical Islamists amonst us today.

Having said that, as Churchill said, "...there are no permanent allies; only permanent interests."

Let's stick with the dolphin-free tuna example.

America is a mature democracy with an advanced economy. We can make decisions for ourselves other nations can only dream of. We have elected via the democratic process, to preserve dolphin, and have banned methods of catching tuna that kill dolphin.

I fully understand that Mexico may not be able to afford to make such a decision. That is their sovereign right.

But for Mexico to use NAFTA and WTO to supercede our own laws is troubling.

In addition, the Administration is aiding the Mexican, not the US, position in this matter.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0101-03.htm

I am somewhat suprised the Limbaughs of the world are at peace with backdoor deals that undercut democratically made decisions. George Wills, that defender of American sovereignity, is strangely silent as well. The WTO and NAFTA mechanisms would seem to cut against classis conservatism.

I understand my way of thinking is out-of-date, and old-school. I did not arrive there with a closed mind - I am there eyes-wide-open.

The Tower of Babel offers timeless lessons about the centralization of power.

 

[mweiss]

Let's stick with the dolphin-free tuna example.

Your example is fine. My only point is that it's not a one-way street. The US might not get everything, but neither will the other participants. Everyone gains some and loses some. The goal is supposed to be that the gains outweigh the losses. If not, then shame on those who signed the treaty.

for Mexico to use NAFTA and WTO to supercede our own laws is troubling.

It's troubling, but they're not superceding our laws, by definition. To me, that was a mistake in the treaty that should never have been permitted. But it was, and we're stuck with it, just as we're stuck with whatever laws Congress deems fit to foist upon us.

 

[diogenes]

Concur.