UN Logo

If you will indulge me, follow my logic for a moment. From its inception in San Francisco in 1945, the goal and intention of the UN (logo, right) was to be an advisory body by and through which various countries throughout the world could work out their differences. Their purpose was to function as an advisory body – a broker of sorts if you will – note I did not say power broker. Yet in a violation of its own charter, that is exactly what it has become for many wannabe countries throughout the world as they band together against the developed and other industrialized countries seeking a forced redistribution of wealth. Whether they are forced to live under dictators who are pimping their people living off their labor or just too lazy to go out make the most of it on their own, is really anybody’s guess.

As examples, look no further than South Africa since the end of Apartheid, Zimbabwe with the rigged ‘elections’ of Robert Mugabe in what amounts to his presidencies for a life that will not end soon enough, and you’ll see what happens when fundamental principles of free enterprise are undermined and destroyed by despots who are absorbed. The South African Rand (currency), worth about a dollar (US) before the end of apartheid, is now only worth about a dime – a 90% decline in value. Is it any wonder that many of the whites and other professionally skilled people have left not only South Africa, but also Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia) in droves?

The purpose of the International Criminal Court – on paper at least – was to establish a means to establish a permanent war criminals tribunal that could be used on an ongoing basis. Individual tribunals have been created in the past on a case-by-case basis such as the Rwandan genocide as well as the genocide occurring in the former Yugoslavia for which former strongman Slobodan Milosevic is currently on trial in The Hague.

Justifying the decision to withdraw from the ICC, the United States cited its concerns over fears that the court’s impact on American citizens, arguing that safeguards against frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions of U.S. soldiers and officials are not sufficient and that certain rights and liberties guaranteed American citizens in the Constitution of the United States would be ignored, thus repudiating the principle and concept of national sovereignty. To an organization such as the UN that seeks to impose their will at the expense of our national sovereignty, to them I say : KISS THIS!!

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) claims the withdrawal from the treaty calls US credibility into question, a claim that is doubtful at best and laughable at worst. The truth is that Clinton signed it shortly before he left office – knowingly full well he would never submit it to the Senate, as one of his final ways of giving America the proverbial finger as it were – a gesture he used early and used often during the eight years we had to endure him while in the Oral Office – pun fully intended.

Talk Radio Host Rush Limbaugh

Regarding the Clintons: In his radio broadcast yesterday, talk show host Rush Limbaugh (left) clearly outlined how from the outset of their administration that it was the plan of Bill and Hillary Clinton to divide Americans by as many classes and in as many ways as possible – rich against poor; white against black against brown against yellow against red; Christian against Jew against Muslim against non-believer; homeowner against apartment-dweller; Conservative against Liberal – you name it, the Clintons were seeking to find a way to divide this great nation asunder.

While the United States is withdrawing from the court, it is not actively crusading against the court or its purposes. Instead, the United States favors working with nongovernmental organizations, private industry and universities and law schools to help individual countries set up tribunals if and when they need them. What the US is seeking to do is protect its vital national security interests, and not allow them to be subject to being jeopardized by third-world wannabes and tin-pot dictators with an ax to grind. Further, the ICC is unnecessary as it pertains to US troops as they are in most (if not nearly all) cases subject to a SOFA (Status of Forces) Agreement with the host countries that provides the host countries with legitimate means to prosecute rogue US troops while respecting their rights under US law. Having served in Korea for a brief time myself, I was required to carry a SOFA card with me at all times just in case I was stopped by Korean police for any reason – not that I ever was, but just in case.

From the beginning, the United States has consistently put forward the largest part of the UN budget, yet for the last 20-30 years, the others who enjoy its largesse have consistently treated it like garbage. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you – but then again, what do you expect from a bunch of terminal ingrates! Having always been on the receiving end of assistance from the ‘haves’ of the world, they have become conditioned to and ‘expect’ this perpetual international welfare assistance. Yet when they have floods or famine of any kind, they are holding out their hand and guess who picks up the tab? We do!

So although the US is formally out of the International Criminal ‘Kangaroo’ Court, you can expect that the UN and its other member states that are in its perpetual anti-American and anti-Israeli modes to seek to draw us into its nets – a trap which we will never fall into.

Now, were the White House to actually reverse its strategy of avoiding confrontation all costs in its efforts to NOT be like Clinton as Rush alluded to in his broadcast yesterday – which if left unabated, is guaranteed to make President George W. Bush a one-term president just like his father, there may just be some meaningful GOP victories to talk about over the morning orange juice. Were we to have some of those, then that would be something America would have for the first time since Ronald Reagan was in charge back in 1981.

Now that American has formally pulled out of the ICC, it is time for the president to show more of the leadership for which he was elected and put the pedal to the metal and push through his full agenda – economic, military and especially judicial as it pertains to getting his nominees through committee and to the full Senate floor. Bold and decisive leadership not only gets you respected and admired – it also gets what every first-term administration wants; a second term.