3 ms·
The US hardly ever takes its cues from the UN. It's fairly obvious that if the US wants to take action that's not sanctioned by the UN, it will find a way to ta
by insickness 13y ago
The US hardly ever takes its cues from the UN. It's fairly obvious that if the US wants to take action that's not sanctioned by the UN, it will find a way to take that action or get the UN to follow along. The difficult part here is the US changing it's internal stance on drugs. Compared to that, dealing with the UN is a piece of cake.
- AndrewKemendo 13y agoThat's also not true. The vast majority of UN treaties which the US is a signatory to are enforced by the US* on US citizens. If your claim is that we only enforce the ones we lead on then that is an impossible claim to prove - by design. 99% of UN treaties no one will ever know of, things related to fisheries, wildlife preservation, telecommunications, arms control etc... check it out for yourself on their database [1] There are of course major examples of unilateral actions on the part of the US to be sure, but those are outliers albeit extreme ones. [1] http://treaties.un.org/pages/ParticipationStatus.aspx http://treaties.un.org/pages/ParticipationStatus.aspx
- leoedin 13y agoI think you're mistaking the order of action. Yes, the US is a signatory to many UN treaties, but this isn't because the UN released the treaty and the US reluctantly signed up. The US is a founding member of the UN, and uses the body to enforce American values on the world. The UN convention on narcotics is a product of the US war on drugs, not the other way round. The US use trade sanctions as a stick to force others to sign up.