I remain committed to the UN and think a LOD would be a disaster. Has anyone noticed that many democracies oppose us on many issues regarding our self defense?
But do we really want a League of Democracies? I think this option would actually be worse than what we have.
Just think, the world's democracies haven't exactly been eager to support us in Iraq. Sure, we do have support from many democracies, but just because we'd be in the company of free countries does not mean they'd support us. And if we were members of a League of Democracies, would we not have a greater obligation to follow the majority even if we don't formally have a majority rules agreement to be a member?
Face it, having thugs and fiends in the UN makes it easier for us to ignore that body when it sides with our enemies and instead gather allies outside the UN to support our objectives. If we gain the support of the UN, that's great; but as things stand now, we do not look too bad as far as I'm concerned when we ignore the UN's farcical moral authority.
So end the fantasy of creating a resolute body of freedom-defending democracies banding together to destroy our common enemies. We can't create that in a formal body. For every Australia, Britain, South Korea, or Netherlands that joins us in Iraq, there is a Spain, Belgium, France, or Germany that will snipe at us, work against us, and look for ways to charge us with crimes. We must live with the democracies as they are and not as we wish them to be.
Come on, even Germany and France with leaders who don't bash us aren't likely to join us in anything that would actually compel them to fight. And without obviously anti-American leaders we'd have more difficulty ignoring their opinions.
Why would we tie our hands to a body just as likely to oppose us when we defend ourselves and has the moral legitimacy to constrain us?
