Talk:United Nations Charter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is part of the United Nations WikiProject.	UN Portal

Why is it particularly relevant that the US ratified the treaty? - Khendon 10:10 Oct 10, 2002 (UTC)

Aha! I know, being the poster of that sentence. The relevance is that as the law of the United States the President of the United States is bound by the terms of the Charter; thus, the Bush doctrine is arguably in violation of law. (However, it is just a law and can be modified by statute, as the current (Ocober 10, 2002) resolutions being debated in Congress might do) User:Fredbauder

Does the sentence I just added suit you, then? - Khendon 13:55 Oct 10, 2002 (UTC)

No, the United States is not a parlimentary democracy, thus attempts by the executive branch to act in violation of a United States statute have a significance different from an action by a prime minister. As far as nations being obligated by treaty, that's good in theory, but only in a few countries, and probably only in the United States could that form a complaint in a court that might eventually be granted relief. I think as a true statement, which conveys significant information, it should stay absent some overriding concern requiring its deletion. User:Fredbauder

Then that point should be explicitly made, rather than just an arbitrary-seeming statement about one particular country. - Khendon 08:01 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC)

Because it never ratified the Treaty of Versailles, thus staying out of the League of Nations, which was ultimately a fiasco? (Or looking at the previous text, probably just because the poster was looking at the legal aspect from a US point of view.) --Brion 10:20 Oct 10, 2002 (UTC)

UN Charter question moved to Wikipedia:Reference Desk by Mattworld

Contents 1 Bush Doctrine in UN Charter 2 New Picture 3 Language template poll 4 Bricker Amendment 5 External links 6 The rest of it?

[edit] Bush Doctrine in UN Charter

I think the issue of the Bush Doctrine and the UN Charter is a valid subject, but it doesn't belong in an article about the UN Charter, but rather in the already existing article about the Bush Doctrine.

I concur. I'd rather see an annotated text of the charter, if it can be reproduced here, and a history of its development and noting nations that haven't ratified it. Mkilly 07:38, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If the issue is nations ignoring the UN Charter, there are many, including most of the major powers, not to mention that the US and all of NATO simply bypassed the UN to wage war in former Yugoslavia, because they knew Russia would veto it in the Security Council. If there is no reasonable onjection, I intend to move the material. Cecropia 06:04, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I do not agree NATO was not set up to be indecisive when it came to such matters as yugoslavia. so it it were neccessary for them to get UN approval it would be rediculous to think that they could then be able to react swiftly to any such matters.

I agree, but the material was still here, so I've moved it and made a link there. SpaceFrog 17:46, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] New Picture

Found a picture my Dad has of President Truman signing the Charter, inludes Senator Arthur Vandenburg, Harold Stassen, and, of course, Truman. Should I upload it to replace the current photo of the Egyptian Delegation?- Ben of Oz

[edit] Language template poll

A poll as to whether or not the language template should be included in this article is being conducted at Talk:United_Nations_Commission_on_Human_Rights#Poll Raul654 19:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bricker Amendment

For some time I have been working on revisions to the Bricker Amendment article. I finally posted it and have a PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bricker Amendment/archive1. I'd welcome comments. I know all those references may seem extravagant, but I'm hoping to get it as an FA and those voters want lots of footnotes. PedanticallySpeaking 16:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

There are currently five different links to the text of the charter, which is rather excessive. Surely a link to the official site and/or the Wikisource text are all that's needed. Silverhelm 06:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

dominique hamilton is so sexy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.56.76.106 (talk) 16:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The rest of it?

As I understand it, there are nineteen chapters. We only have two here. Does anyone else see a distinct lack of information? 125.238.89.244 (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)