Let me set up a hypo for you: Say California becomes Majority Hispanic and a radical group “La Raza” starts attacking Anglo-American’s and government officials as well as moderate hispanics untill finally our military goes after the militants. La Raza claims atrocities every time our troops kill any of their fighters and Russia and the E.U. come and bombs us untill we agree to a UN resolution where we will withdraw our troops from California while Russia and the EU will keep troops in CA. Under this resolution California will have autonomy but will remain part of the United States. Say, that Ten Years later Russia and the EU encourage the Californians to refuse to negotiate with us and instead assure them that they will recognize their independance. California declarers independance and Russia and most E.U. countries recognize their independance even though it violates the U.N. resolution and has not been accepted by the security council due to Britains veto. Remember that Russia and teh E.U. are maintaining troops in California and thus preventing us from going in to end this rebellion. So, here is my question. Would you consider this to be an act of war by Russia against the United States? And would you understand if a group of angry American teenagers attacked and burned the Russian embassy under these circumstances?
Good post. Most people are unable to do the mental detachment to consider your scenario. That’s not being critical of them, but it’s just a fact. This is why I’ve always told people who don’t worry about the UN to try and view the UN and it’s power from a position of weakness. Now they can fully appreciate the UN’s power, or any other Regional blocks that pop up down the road.