How would the NBA National Championship be if toward the end of a series, during a tie breaking game, after the players have delivered a blockbuster performance with 12 3-point shots, the ref decides during the 4th quarter that 3-pointers will now be counted as only 1 point each, and delivers the victory to the underdog? Sound outrageous? Inconceivable? Well that's basically what we've done to our good friends in Colombia.
Let's get one thing straight: The success of nations is based on long term adherence to the rule of law. Let's get George Washington's view on the matter:
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. ~Farewell Address 1796Throughout the address Washington discourages political engagements with other countries, yet despite his disapproval of them he clearly states that we should honor existing agreements with perfect good faith. Even if you oppose an agreement, you should still act in good faith. By the way, he was in favor of commercial relations...a free trader.
In this case we started down the negotiating road with Colombia and Democrats asked for countless concessions, with which the Colombians have complied. All of this is done in the good faith that a deal will eventually be consummated if the demands are met. Then at the end of this exercise the Democrats grow weary with Colombia's accommodations and kill the deal by demanding things that are outside of Colombia's control like, "All labor leaders in Colombia must be exempt from death by killing or natural causes."
Is the Colombian gov't killing their labor leaders? No. Who's killing them? Does it have anything to do with the billions in drug money that America pumps into Colombia's illegal trafficking market?
Extreme Circumstances
You could argue that under extreme circumstances the U.S. can renege on its promises and throw our allies under the bus. What are the extreme circumstances in this case? Does the agreement mean that we'll be flooded with exports and lose jobs? No, 90% of Colombia's exports to the U.S. are not charged a tariff. It would mostly amount to us being able to export more goods and equipment...you know, like dump trucks and mining equipment...made in the U.S.A.
What amazes me is that if Colombia bombed Cape Canaveral, the liberals would be in favor of sitting down with them to talk and work things out. Heaven forbid we should be perceived as a bully, rogue nation, or of acting unilaterally. But under the circumstances where Colombia has made excellent progress over the last decade, and wants to be our friend and economic partner, and already made many concessions to work with us, we decide that dialog is fruitless and walk away from the table?
Sovereignty
Also at issue here is the question of sovereignty. Why shouldn't we have attacked Iraq? "We can't just go into a sovereign, self-governing nation because we disagree with the way they're doing things? If the Iraqis want change, let them fight for it." Got it. When it comes to crazy, whacked-out countries with despots, recognize their sovereignty.
Genocide, economic interests (such as oil), unequal rights for women, and the violation of treaties are not a basis for interfering with another country's sovereignty. But the moment you want to be our friend, the moment you want to clean up your act, fight for change, reduce crime, provide freedom for your citizenry and approach us with the hand of friendship your sovereignty is finished. We will reach into you and fiddle with your entrails. We want the final say on what you will and will not do within the borders of your own country. If you want to be our friend and trade with us, we will scrutinize every aspect of your behavior, demand that you do things our way, and then after all is said and done, we'll stand you up like a dolled-up prom date.
No comments:
Post a Comment