Reply #50: Sorry

[Nicholas_J]

But the first unmentionable, forbidden and repressed fact about the civilized world is that all civilization is based on warfare.

The second truth, is that all government power rests upon it police and military powers over the public.

The last truth is:

"It is impossible to establish a just social order."

--Bertrand de Jouvenal, Sovereignty, 1957

Bertrand de Jourvenal, in his work, "Soverignty", states, and I think truthfully, that the very worse kind of government is the one that has lost the good will of those ruled, and must resort to setting examples by using force to control a small portion of society, in order to convince the larger portion to stay in line. The good graces of the citizenry are no longer enough to give those who rule, the power to do so.

One of my favorites is:

First, popular sovreignty has tended to make it harder to recognize that society is legitimated not by majority will but by its accordance with certain principles of natural justice, like the right to liberty and property.

Indeed, historically, popular sovereignty has been often more effec-
tive at destroying the customary structures and mediating institu-
tions that protect natural rights than monarchs, because monarchi-
cal authority was hedged in by customary law and other restraint

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:L8V7vgwpF3kJ:www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/292/McGinnis.pdf+%22Bertrand+de+Jouvenal%22+%22Sovereignty%22+worse+government&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Bottom line is, we are not responsible at all...

If anything, Saadam is resonsible, because all government, whether of a nation, or the international community, is based on both spoken and written agreement of leaders, with the consent of their people, to abide by a set of mutually acceptable rules.

After all, Saddam signed the U.N. Charter, and agreed to certain things. But so did the U.S. This is a very interesting situation the world now finds itself in.

A hundred and forty odd years ago, the First Republican states "A House Divided cannot stand" referring to the fact that a group of states signed a compact agreeing to be part of a larger community of states, called the United States. That this permanancy was a contract. Thatit was enterered into for perpetuity, was not part of the document, but implied.

Now a larger house is being divided, but both parties have broken the terms of the founding document, Iraq, by breaking the rules of the "INTERNATIONAL CONSTITUTION", and the U.S. by breaking the rules of the same "CONSTITUTION" in order to enforce the rules that Iraq broke, outside of the laws binding the international community.

I wonder how long the house will stand.