Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement \u2026 <\/i><\/p>\n
\u2014Isaiah 28:15<\/i><\/p>\n
6771<\/b> U.S. Commitments <\/b><\/p>\n
Formal treaties pledge the U.S. to defend 42 countries around the world. This does not include countries such as Israel covered by informal but nevertheless deep commitments, or by obligations to the United Nations. <\/p>\n
The U.S. maintains more than 300 major military bases in 20 countries\u2014and great numbers of smaller installations scattered across much of the earth. <\/p>\n
American military forces now stationed in foreign countries total about 485,000. With these troops are 370,000 dependents. <\/p>\n
6772<\/b> Is Intent A Contract? <\/b><\/p>\n
The Canadian government was accused of concealing an uranium contract in 1961. Prime Minister Diefenbaker declared no contract existed. The Eldorado Mining and Refuning Company, Limited, insisted that the company has a firm contract\u2014that \u201can exchange of letter of intent is a firm contract.\u201d<\/p>\n
This political row became a battle of words and their meanings. It was all about $192,000,000 worth of uranium that Canada hopes to sell to Britain in the 1963\u201366 period, and the nice differences between a letter of intent, a commitment, a contract, and a formal contract. <\/p>\n
6773<\/b> The Helsinki Conference<\/b><\/p>\n
Thirty-five national leaders finally completed a three-day conference in Helsinki, Finland. After delivering a 20-minute speech, each representative signed a 25,000-word document worked out by the conference negotiators during the previous 22 months, when they haggled over the text, sometimes bogging down in disagreement over the placement of commas. <\/p>\n
The National Observer<\/i> says, \u201cThe result of their labour is something akin to what 35 gourmet cooks might create if each contributed to the brewing of the broth: None would achieve the taste he sought, but neither would he be wholly displeased by the flavour.\u201d<\/p>\n
The 96-page document which was finally signed \u201cis the quintessence of compromise. The language is studded with ambiguities. Some clauses apparently contradict others. Jabberwockian sentences puzzled even many of the negotiators. Moreover, the document exacts no legal obligation from any of the signatory nations. In the end, it is a document for all seasons, nothing more nor less than what any of the 35 nations interpret it to be \u2026 American officials see value in the agreement; though not legally binding, it will carry considerable \u201cmoral\u201d force \u2026 U.S. officials readily concede that the agreement contains no machinery for enforcement. Nations are free to comply with those provisions they favor, ignore those they object to.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u2014Prairie Overcomer<\/i><\/p>\n
6774<\/b> Antarctic Treaty<\/b><\/p>\n
The Antarctic Treaty of 1961 provides that the continent was to be considered the entire world\u2019s property until 1991, a place to pursue the interests of science for the good of all. <\/p>\n
The Antarctic is one-tenth of all the land on earth. <\/p>\n
6775<\/b> Weapons Treaties<\/b><\/p>\n
The explosive rush of weapons development is now so great that treaties cannot be written fast enough to match the pace of technology. <\/p>\n
Russia and the U.S. in November 1974, negotiated a provisional agreement that was believed to curb the nuclear-arms race. Within a few months, military technology had placed the terms of the accord out-of-date. <\/p>\n
6776<\/b> SALT Agreement<\/b><\/p>\n
Under the first strategic-arms-limitation accord, called SALT and signed in Moscow May 26, 1972, the U.S. and Russia agreed to a numerical ceiling on their offensive missiles. <\/p>\n
The five-year agreement gave Russia an advantage, permitting the Soviets a total of 2,358 land-based and sea-based missiles, compared with 1,710 for the U.S. <\/p>\n
The U.S. had counted on its lead in MIRVs\u2014multiple, independently-targeted reentry vehicles\u2014to offset the apparent Soviet advantage. In this way, a strategic balance was supposed to have been achieved. <\/p>\n
But the Soviet government proceeded with a program of MIRV-ing, and by 1975 were installing these enormously destructive devices. The 5-year accord expired in Oct. 3, 1977. <\/p>\n
6777<\/b> U.S. Anti-Missile System Dismantled<\/b><\/p>\n
Washington (UPI)\u2014To protect itself against a Soviet missile action, the United States spent about $6 billion developing an anti-missile missile which finally became operational Oct. 1, 1975. <\/p>\n
But weeks later, the Senate voted to put the missiles in the nation\u2019s only antiballistic missile (ABM) system into mothballs. Earlier on Oct. 2, the House of Representatives voted to dismantle the facility, and the Pentagon has drawn up plans for taking it apart. <\/p>\n
Senator Kennedy, who supported the proposal, argued that the ABM defense did not increase the nation\u2019s security and represented an unwarranted financial burden. <\/p>\n
6778<\/b> The Pope\u2019s Bull<\/b><\/p>\n
Prompted by widespread fears that new weapons of mass destruction might wipe out Western civilization, the Pope issued a bull forbidding their use by any Christian state against another, whatever the provocation. <\/p>\n
The hydrogen bomb? Germ warfare? Actually, the story appeared in 1139 and was issued by Pope Innocent II. He was talking about the newly-invented crossbow. <\/p>\n
\u2014Bits & Pieces<\/i><\/p>\n
6779<\/b> Munich Agreement<\/b><\/p>\n
Thirty years ago the Western democracies sold out a third of Czechoslovakia to Nazi tyranny. The transaction at Munich on September 30, 1938, placed such a blot upon history that the city\u2019s name now appears in dictionaries as a commonly used term denoting dishonorable appeasement. <\/p>\n
The Czechs have never recovered from Munich. The relative ease with which they moved into the Communist camp after World War II may be attributable less to their taste for Marxism than to their wariness of the West, which let them down so badly. <\/p>\n
\u2014Christianity Today<\/i><\/p>\n
6780<\/b> Queen\u2019s Personal Request<\/b><\/p>\n
A draft of a treaty of amity and commerce was sent out from England to Madagascar, and on the margin these words were written: \u201cQueen Victoria asks, as a personal favour to herself, that the Queen of Madagascar will allow no persecution of the Christians.\u201d<\/p>\n
A month afterwards the treaty was signed in Madagascar, with the insertion of the following words: \u201cIn accordance with the wish of Queen Victoria, the Queen of Madagascar agrees there shall be no persecution of the Christians in Madagascar.\u201d<\/p>\n
6781<\/b> Penn\u2019s Agreement With Indians<\/b><\/p>\n
The value of a peacemaker in national life cannot be overestimated. When William Penn began his duties as chief magistrate, a great conference was appointed with the native chiefs. Penn, accompanied by a few unarmed friends, clad in the simple garb of the Quakers, came to the appointed spot. The chieftains, also unarmed, sat in a semicircle on the ground. <\/p>\n
Standing before them and speaking by an interpreter, he said: \u201cMy friends, we have met on the broad pathway of good faith. We are all one flesh and blood. Being brethren, no advantage shall be taken on either side. When disputes arise, we will settle them in council. Between us there shall be nothing but openness and love.\u201d The chiefs replied: \u201cWhile the rivers run and the sun shines we will live in peace with the children of William Penn.\u201d<\/p>\n
No record was made of the treaty, for none was needed. Its terms were written, not on decaying parchment, but on the living hearts of men. For more than seventy years, during which the province remained under the control of the Friends, not a single war whoop was heard within the borders of Pennsylvania. The Quaker hat and coat proved to be a better defense for the wearer than the coat of mail and musket. <\/p>\n
\u2014History of the World<\/i><\/p>\n
6782<\/b> Negotiating With Russia<\/b><\/p>\n
Former Secretary of State John Foster Dulles reported at the NATO conference in Paris that dealing with the Russians is something like the situation encountered by a husband who had argued with his wife so bitterly they had stopped speaking. Finally, the husband decided to break the impasse. <\/p>\n
\u201cYou know, dear,\u201d he said, \u201cI\u2019ve been thinking over our argument.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWell?\u201d she snapped. <\/p>\n
\u201cYes, dear, I\u2019ve decided to agree with you after all.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWon\u2019t do you any good,\u201d she retorted. \u201cI\u2019ve changed my mind.\u201d<\/p>\n
6783<\/b> \u201cWe Have A Treaty\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n
Shortly before his death, the Duke of Burgundy was presiding over the Cabinet Council of France. A proposal was made by the ministers that would violate a treaty but would secure important advantages for the country. Many \u201cgood\u201d reasons were offered to justify the deed. The Duke listened in silence, and when all had spoken, he closed the conference without giving approval. Placing his hand upon a copy of the original agreement, he said with firmness in his voice, \u201cGentlemen, we have a TREATY!\u201d<\/p>\n
\u2014Our Daily Bread<\/i><\/p>\n
6784<\/b> Epigram On Treaties<\/b><\/p>\n
\u2022 When nations talk about reducing armies, every nation wants the last sword. \u2014Frank Jay Markey<\/p>\n
See also:<\/b> Peace Settlements <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement \u2026 \u2014Isaiah 28:15 6771 U.S. Commitments Formal treaties pledge the U.S. to defend 42 countries around the world. This does not include countries such as Israel covered by informal but nevertheless deep commitments, or by obligations to … Continue reading “TREATIES”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5346","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sermons"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5346","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5346"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5346\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}