Replies

I found this on the LOST--

"Proponents of the move say ratification is needed to ensure U.S. interests are included in international action in the arena and to protect resources up to 200 miles from U.S. shorelines as guaranteed under the convention."

Isn't this why we have a military-- to ensure U.S. interests and to protect our resources? Why do we need the UN's permission to do any of these things?

The same reason we have "homeland" security instead of national security. Nations may not protect their interests, that threatens the UN. But homelands are ok, because they balkanize nations.

For example, the United States is one nation of 50 states with the full protection of the US Constitution.

But, in the UN view, the United states is a collection of "homelands", with the population based on ethnicity. So the southwest is an hispanic homeland. Homelands cross state borders and become "states within states" degrading our Constitution and our representative government. The UN prefers homelands instead of nations, and then convinces people that it will help you protect your "homeland" if you get into "trouble".

The Congress and President have been giving the UN more and more power over we the people. The FTAA scheduled to be implemented next year is also a UN project.