In an earlier thread, Davin wrote:

...we are not the elected or appointed Cops of the 'legal authority of all nations'- in fact, thankfully, I don't think any such authority exists.

In an earlier time, when the worst a nation could throw at another nation was guns and horsedrawn artillery, it was easy for neighbors to isolate threats. Now, when weapons of mass destruction and high-tech delivery systems are becoming a dime a dozen, we may not have the luxury of the "live and let live" options any more.

It's one thing to have the guy next door reload shotgun shells in his basement, if he's a hunter. If he has a record of shooting people with a shotgun, it becomes a different story. When he buys a truck, and starts taking fertilizer deliveries, it jumps up another notch.

No one would argue that at some point, the cops are called in to at least investigate before the guy actually commits a crime. Heck, maybe he's going to plant thirty acres of roses. On the other hand, if he goes out into the woods and sets off explosions.

But there is an authority available to reign him in if necessary. Ideally, a police force restricted by a government and a set of objective laws that hold individual rights as paramount. But that's in your home town.

Iraq, or North Korea, or someone else is rocking the international boat. Who you gonna call?

It was supposed to be the U.N., but the U.N. isn't qualified any more, if it ever was. You can't have a police force where the thugs hold a good number of positions on the police commission, the commission is corrupt, and the moral code is that of collectivism.

The U.S. has been basically acting as the Lone Ranger on these things. While maybe it can be justified...or not...(a whole separate argument), it doesn't look like any other agency is willing to get the job done. And I'm afraid the job needs doing. A world police force may be necessary.

The down side to any world police force is that almost certainly it will attract collectivists to its ranks like flies to dung. The individual states of America signed over certain limited powers to a national government when the Constitution was signed, in order to make relations between states smoother and more civilized. The Federal government has since pretty much taken all the power to itself. I see no reason to believe that a World Government, regardless of how limited its authority in the beginning, wouldn't decay into the same kind of entity. How could that be prevented? Is it even possible to create an organization based on principles of freedom and individual rights any more? There's a good chance we may be worse off with "Wings Over The World" than without them.

Any ideas on this? Reform the U.N. and hope it can finally take up the job? Restrict voting membership to non-totalitarian governments? Rework NATO or some other group into such a police force? Keep on going with individual nations making their own calls on these things, and keep away from any kind of World Government?

I've got no easy answers. I'm not even sure I know all the questions. But I don't think it's possible to just let the thugs run their own nations as they see fit any more, especially now that they have made a habit of stretching themselves into other nations.