During the mid 90s, I particpated in the Znet chat rooms and found the level of debate wanting; the worldview, limited; so I left. I used to read the magazine too and so I know where they're coming from. Perhaps it wasn't fair of me to conject, but I admitted I was and was sure I'd be corrected if wrong.
>Incidentally, while I support the International Criminal Court myself, I
>don't know why you would count the European position as a great victory.
>Given universal opposition by almost the entire world, what happens? Is
>the U.S. subject to this court in any form whatsoever? No, it merely
>allowed the EU to save face; instead of a permanent exemption the U.S.
>received a one year extension - renewable at end of the year on the
>basis of the same threat the U.S. used to gain this exemption, or on the
>basis of more severe threats if that is what it takes.
The fact remains the US backed down.
>I will add the Zmag, and it's related web site Znet have mentioned the
>ICC for years, mostly in passing when discussing other subjects -
>generally favorably towards the idea, and sarcastically toward the
>United States for joining with China and Iraq in opposing it.
This is like having your cake and eating it, too, the type of argument I got tired of hearing over on Znet. Again, I doubt you could produce an article on the subject. Ed Herman has been bashing the human rights groups for years, (sometimes deservedly so).
>And in terms of other countries "doing a better job of defanging the
>U.S. than the ultras are", are I would say not only that, but they are
>doing a better job than all American liberals and leftists combined.
>That is not because they are doing a great job - but possessing nuclear
>weapons, large conventional militaries, multi hundred billion dollar
>budgets and such, they have more power than American leftist - thus when
>they happen to WANT to defang the U.S. they can do more they we can. Of
>course, as this ICC incident shows they still can't do very much.
>Essentially, even when they want to oppose the U.S., they still end up
>having to back down.
I repeat, both sides compromised, but the significant fact this time is that the US did so. I'll wait and see if its reported in the next Z mag, I doubt it will be.
>Um, as a last note, I would say that this post of your was , well, not
>up to your usual standard. Perhaps you were tired or unusually stressed
>when you wrote it? <smile>
>
>Gar
Maybe the grammar wasn't the best; perhaps I should agonize a little more over the posts to the list. Nevertheless please spare me the patronizing crap. <scowl>