Also please ping other Southerners for theirs as well.
What would be the condition of the States attached to the Union & its Govt. and regarding both as essential to their well-being, if a State placed in the midst of them were to renounce its Federal obligations, and erect itself into an independent and alien nation? Could the States N. & S. of Virginia, Pennsyla. or N. York, or of some other States however small, remain associated and enjoy their present happiness, if geographically politically and practically thrown apart by such a breach in the chain which unites their interests and binds them together as neighbours & fellow citizens. It could not be. The innovation would be fatal to the Federal Governt. fatal to the Union, and fatal to the hopes of liberty and humanity; and presents a catastrophe at which all ought to shudder.--Letter to Nicholas Trist, 15 Feb. 1830And...
Even in the case of a mere League between nations absolutely independent of each other, neither party has a right to dissolve it at pleasure; each having an equal right to expound its obligations, and neither, consequently a greater right to pronounce the compact void than the other has to insist on the mutual execution of it. [See, in Mr. Jefferson's volumes, his letters to J. M. Mr. Monroe & Col. Carrington]
The United Nations, so far as I know, is a league. I think it is fair to say that the US should satisfy whatever obligations it has agreed to. The states of the Union have even stronger obligations, as I think Mr. Madison clearly pointed out.
The US Constitution, however, in the Supremacy Clause, clearly says that state law must conform with the Constitution and the President has a sworn duty to see that the laws are fatefully enforced and applied equally in every jurisdiction. .
Who ever you heard say otherwise has no damn idea what he is talking about.
BTW. In the 60+ years the UN has been around there have been somewhere around 60 wars. On only three occasions has the UN authorized use of force and those three were all requested by the United States --- Korea in 1950, Gulf I in 1990, and Gulf II with resolution 1444 in November 2002. Russia, China, France and other nations have had wars that were either outside of UN approval or specifically condemned by the UN. No one but the US has ever even asked for UN permission. What the UN said never bothered France or Russia one bit when they were involved in following their self-interests. What the UN says will not bother us in the least as we move in to finally crush Saddam.
If the US were to secede from the UN, could the other nations label us a "rouge" nation much as the Southern states were labeled by the unionists? Absolutely.
Could the other nations overtly, or through subterfuge, engage the US in conflict to bring it back into the fold? Absolutely.
If successful, could the other nations rewrite our Constitution and impose a government to reduce our sovereignty to international law and organizations? Absolutely.
And would the historians of the World Federation acclaim the motives and justify the outcomes of such an act? Absolutely.
Does it matter to me whether the confederate states had a right to secede? No.
Would I have forced the confederate states back into the union? Yes.
Has federalism over confederacy swung power from where it was originally held between 1777/1781 (The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union) to 1787/1789 (Constitution of The United States) through the Civil War and suceeding world wars? Absolutely.
Personally, I'd like to see the US bring rouge nations like Iraq, Iran and North Korea into the fold, rather than the reverse. Unfortunately, we may need to start with France, Germany and Russia.
So the question becomes one of what is our arrangement under the UN Charter, is it a treaty or something else, and whether or not the Constitution protects us from anything other wise in the arrangement. If we do not like the answers to those questions, then other questions are raised, such as do our complaints rise to the level of the Declaration of Independence such that we are "impelled" to separation.This Constitution, and the Laws of the United
States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in
every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution
or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
From the Preamble to the Articles of Confederation:
From the Articles of Confederation:Whereas the Delegates of the United States of America in Congress
assembled did on the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our
Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventyseven, and in the Second
Year of the Independence of America agree to certain articles of
Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of
Newhampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhodeisland and Providence
Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina and
Georgia in the Words following, viz.
From the Northwest Ordinance of 1787:Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determinations of
the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by
this confederation are submitted to them. And the articles of this
confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the
Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time
hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed
to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed
by the Legislatures of every State.
Sec. 14. It is hereby ordained and declared, by the authority
aforesaid, that the following articles shall be considered as
articles of compact, between the original States and the people and
States in the said territory, and forever remain unalterable,
unless by common consent, to wit:
A cursory consideration indicates that the Founders intended a perpetual union unless there was common consent to separate or a complaint rising to the level of the Decleration of Independance.
The Constitution of the United States does not appear to have changed this. The Constitution of the United States merely sets up a new form of government for the States previously joined in perpetual union. They could have set up a Constitutional Monarchy, and it would have been the same States joined in perpetual union.