0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
So why wouldn't a President sign a treaty with some idiot country then not do what w agreed to (while idiot country does) then when you get caught say "hey, not ratified sorry" kind of like having your fingers crossed?
Quote from: Kat Kid on March 11, 2015, 01:48:17 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 08:55:37 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 11, 2015, 07:13:15 AMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 12:10:04 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 10, 2015, 08:38:15 PMQuote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.Pretty sure they do.Check your stats!First the treaty must be signed by the president or an authorized representative of the U.S. Govt then the senates 2/3rds vote as their advice and consent, then the president ratifies it.Can it be a legally binding treaty if the senate doesn't give its consent, or would it be a multilateral agreement?American law? International law? If the UN Security council passes a resolution that is binding and does not need Senate approval. If the US makes a multi-lateral agreement it is as binding as the parties that signed it want it to be. For something to be ratified, it must have a 2/3rds vote of approval from the Senate, but that is only the 2nd of 3 steps and will not result in ratification by itself.So, consent of the senate is needed for any treaty to be ratified and legally binding as far as the US is concerned, and any agreement a president might sign can be revoked at any time by the current president. Basically, there is no treaty ratification without consent of the senate. Semantics, wow.
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 08:55:37 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 11, 2015, 07:13:15 AMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 12:10:04 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 10, 2015, 08:38:15 PMQuote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.Pretty sure they do.Check your stats!First the treaty must be signed by the president or an authorized representative of the U.S. Govt then the senates 2/3rds vote as their advice and consent, then the president ratifies it.Can it be a legally binding treaty if the senate doesn't give its consent, or would it be a multilateral agreement?American law? International law? If the UN Security council passes a resolution that is binding and does not need Senate approval. If the US makes a multi-lateral agreement it is as binding as the parties that signed it want it to be. For something to be ratified, it must have a 2/3rds vote of approval from the Senate, but that is only the 2nd of 3 steps and will not result in ratification by itself.
Quote from: Kat Kid on March 11, 2015, 07:13:15 AMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 12:10:04 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 10, 2015, 08:38:15 PMQuote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.Pretty sure they do.Check your stats!First the treaty must be signed by the president or an authorized representative of the U.S. Govt then the senates 2/3rds vote as their advice and consent, then the president ratifies it.Can it be a legally binding treaty if the senate doesn't give its consent, or would it be a multilateral agreement?
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2015, 12:10:04 AMQuote from: Kat Kid on March 10, 2015, 08:38:15 PMQuote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.Pretty sure they do.Check your stats!First the treaty must be signed by the president or an authorized representative of the U.S. Govt then the senates 2/3rds vote as their advice and consent, then the president ratifies it.
Quote from: Kat Kid on March 10, 2015, 08:38:15 PMQuote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.Pretty sure they do.
Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 10, 2015, 06:26:56 PMQuote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.You're right. There is a multi-lateral agreement about sanctions in place and negotiations are ongoing for a multi-lateral agreement. No treaty. The Senate still doesn't ratify treaties.
Quote from: renocat on March 10, 2015, 05:18:36 PMThey are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?This isn't a treaty. Obama is the master of doing whatever the hell he wants by just calling things by other names.
They are saying we trust this President as far s we can throw a truckload of wild eyed crazed nut mullahs from Iran. Did Congress quit ratifying treaties and agreements when it comes to nukes?
