• vlad
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51 year ago

    I do understand why you would want to be able to exit fast. I think it makes sense for the individual country as a safety net in case whatever deal you’ve entered goes south.

    …but having a system in place to ensure that the majority agrees with that decision is important.

    • Nougat
      link
      fedilink
      21
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Amy Coney Barrett proves that the US legislature can move fast whenever it wants to.

      • TechyDad
        link
        21 year ago

        And now I’m picturing a Republican Congress and Presidency being voted out by the people, only to have the exiting Congress pass a “We Hereby Exit From All Treaties” bill, signed by the President before the changeover happens. All to leave the incoming Democratic Congress/President with a huge foreign relations mess to clean up.

    • @Nightwingdragon
      link
      English
      101 year ago

      I do understand why you would want to be able to exit fast.

      If there’s a legitimate reason why we would need to “exit a treaty fast”, then I’m sure that Congress would have no issues approving it. I mean, I know we’re in the era of “because fuck you that’s why” politics, but if we needed to exit a treaty quickly, there has to be some pretty grave circumstances why, and I’m sure that even the dumbest of the dumb would know to put politics aside for a bit.

        • @Nightwingdragon
          link
          81 year ago

          Even Kevin McCarthy knew when it was time to back down when it came to the debt ceiling fight. When push comes to shove in issues like this, the GOP have historically threatened a default right up until the very last second and then backed down. Most of the time, the threats are little more than red meat for their base and they know (even if they don’t want to publicly say it) that if they were to attempt to follow through on their threats, the results would be significantly worse for everybody.