That's fine and dandy. But by consent and rule of law, even the population of this republic have agreed, for example, that convicted violent felons forfeit their right to posess firearms....even though they retain their inherent right to self-defense.
Since Saddam has lost a war by might, he signed surrender conditions to prove that he no longer would possess WMM. His loss. The international community consented in 1991 that this particular dictator had forfeited his "right" to possess WMM in his "sovereign" borders.
It's foolish to look at this in such a naive fashion, assuming that the despot in question here respects ideal rights and ideal morals.
Just as an individual man has the right of defense, so a nation has that right.
To: exodus
"...by consent and rule of law, even the population of this republic have agreed, for example, that convicted violent felons forfeit their right to posess firearms....even though they retain their inherent right to self-defense..."
# 111 by sam_paine
It was only in 1968 that the "people" decided to EDIT the God-given right of self-defense.
Rights are not for government to grant or modify. Rights are an inherent characteristic of man, and are not to be infringed.
If a man is too dangerous to be trusted with a weapon in public, he should be either imprisoned or killed.
If an prisoner is freed, no man-made law can prevent the acquisition of a weapon.
Self-defense is a right, NOT a privilege of citizenship.
To: exodus
"...It's foolish to look at this in such a naive fashion, assuming that the despot in question here respects ideal rights and ideal morals."
# 111 by sam_paine
I don't care whether Saddam respects rights and morals.
I want my governmemt to follow the law.
The law IS the Constitution.
Just as an individual man has the right of defense, so a nation has that right.
To: exodus
"...Since Saddam has lost a war by might, he signed surrender conditions to prove that he no longer would possess WMM. His loss. The international community consented in 1991 that this particular dictator had forfeited his "right" to possess WMM in his "sovereign" borders..."
# 111 by sam_paine
Terms agreed to at gunpoint are not binding.
The "international community" agreed to leave Saddam in power. Saddam is still the sovereign of his nation, thus he MUST have weapons to fulfil his duty.
Finally, rights cannot be forfeited.