Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

nsacpi said:
China has rule of man

We have rule of law...we should try to hold on to it
Click to expand...
It doesn't exist without enforcement.

If the US doesn't step up and take back over control of this world it will devolve into a hellscape.

In just 1 year Trump might reside over the mullahs being deposed of as well as a communist dictatorship in Venezuela.

This didn't happen by respecting the rule of law.
 
thethe said:
If the US doesn't step up and take back over control of this world it will devolve into a hellscape.
Click to expand...
I think the U.S. has vital interests in many parts of the world and often plays a very positive role around the world. I'm very far from an isolationist. But some self-restraint (whether from adhering to international law and norms or from a sense of proportion) is a good thang.

Places like Greenland and Iceland are important to our national security. Fortunately, we have allies in those places that we can work with to meet our security needs. Alliances are a very valuable force multiplier. It is much more expensive to go it alone. Sometimes it may be necessary to act alone. Greenland is not one of those situations.
 
The rule of law can only exist within the rule of man if you concede that one person is allowed to stand above the law, including the person with the most power.
 
thethe said:
The rule of law is enforced by the rule of man. Otherwise, who does the enforcing?
Click to expand...
Ultimately, it is acceptance of restraints imposed by the rule of law. At various times, there will be individuals or groups or countries powerful enough to be above the law if they so choose. Without a sense of self-restraint from them the rule of law breaks down. In that sense the rule of law is voluntary. If we didn't believe in it, it would break down. The state (government) enforces the rule of law but is also bound by it. The people who exercise power via the state need to recognize this.
 
nsacpi said:
Ultimately, it is acceptance of restraints imposed by the rule of law. At various times, there will be individuals or groups or countries powerful enough to be above the law if they so choose. Without a sense of self-restraint from them the rule of law breaks down. In that sense the rule of law is voluntary. If we didn't believe in it, it would break down.
Click to expand...

We do live in a world where countries could just do that. Do we trust China/Russia will show restraint?
 
thethe said:
We do live in a world where countries could just do that. Do we trust China/Russia will show restraint?
Click to expand...
I think that is why we find ourselves in opposition to China/Russia. Do we want the rule of law or the rule of man? In many ways we choose to handicap ourselves when competing with Russia and China because of the restraints imposed by our principles (including rule of law). But those principles are of such overriding importance that we accept these handicaps.
 
nsacpi said:
I think that is why we find ourselves in opposition to China/Russia. Do we want the rule of law or the rule of man? In many ways we choose to handicap ourselves when competing with Russia and China because of the restraints imposed by our principles. But those principles are of such overriding importance that we accept these handicaps.
Click to expand...

Oops, you said the magic word …
 
nsacpi said:
I think that is why we find ourselves in opposition to China/Russia. Do we want the rule of law or the rule of man? In many ways we choose to handicap ourselves when competing with Russia and China because of the restraints imposed by our principles (including rule of law). But those principles are of such overriding importance that we accept these handicaps.
Click to expand...
Expecting actors like China/Russia to respect the rule of law without heavy enforcemnt is a fools errand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top