It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UN Law On Removing World Leaders Who Have Gone Insane.

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:42 AM
link   
I realise that no such law exists yet, but it should do. I am of course thinking of Putin. How does the world remove a world leader who has lost his/her marbles, gone senile or gone insane for whatever reason? Would such a law passed by the UN allow for such a thing or would it actually trigger WW3? I am thinking of events in Russia. Surely there must be something medically wrong with Putin for his increasingly irrational behaviour. Has he had some sort of mental breakdown? Is he Ill? Or has he just become so cut off from reality he actually believes what he is doing is justified? In a situation like this, especially when one has their fingers on one of the world's biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons it is a worrying thought.

Surely there should a UN Task force, a blue helmet job, whereby they are sent to a country to remove a leader on medical grounds. Noone is immune from this. Could it work? Should we consider this as a viable proposal? Thoughts are welcomed on this! I just thought it would make for an interesting new angle on all the issues pertaining to WW3. Putin for example has threatened to use nukes. Surely no sane person would advocate this with MAD in mind!




posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Ridiculous idea...but let play with it.

I have a better question...who would be the one to determine who is mad ?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

I thought of this more than a few times over the last couple of decades, but mostly when it came to places in Africa. These places are sometimes lush with extremely fertile soil, rare minerals, millions of healthy and determined people, and many times are in places ripe for booming trade (waterways, oceanfront, etc.).

The problem isn't always the leader though. Even Putin has a massive following (forgetting the approval ratings and election results), removing the man doesn't change much. The guy from Liberia that caused the death and destruction of so many of his countrymen didn't cause it all, he just motivated the right people in the wrong way.

Besides, the UN isn't exactly the moral authority in who's "bad" and "good", I actually can't think of a single time i'm muttered the words "thank heavens for the UN" in my lifetime...



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Theyd never pass it .. there wouldnt be a single leader left ... theyd all be sharing a prison cell ...



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:51 AM
link   
Putin has veto power over the UN. So he can just veto any vote about him being mad.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss
So any leader who can command a majority in the UN Assembly or Security Council, or wherever the decisive vote is held, becomes the new absolute ruler of the world.
Obviously, because he can depose the leadership of any nation that resists him.
And if an insane ruler can muster such a majority, you've given him the legal power to depose all the sane ones.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
Well as I say it is just a thought. The UN panel does not have to be politicians. They could be medical personnel who can make their decisions purely on medical grounds only and not be persuaded by politics. A bit like what the UN is doing with providing humanitarian assistance for example. I know it is all very idealistic and somewhat Star Trekkish but quite honestly we are all headed for troubling and potentially dark times on a global scale. Surely there is no harm in trying to think outside the sandbox for a while.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Poor Putin I doubt he is bothered as his people adore him which you can't say about Bambam or cameron.

I think its a very dodgy idea because the ones who would decide whose 'mad' are the leaders themselves, not us who already know, not whose mad - but whose corrupt enough to do mad things.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Inspired heart attack? .45 caliber stroke? Oh wait, I am thinking like Putin, not just of Putin!



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Nickn3

hm...strange how that is...I guess it depends on the geo location...first person(s) I thought off for elimination...the Bush clan.

I guess we differ on the "mad" definition.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Ridiculous idea...but let play with it.

I have a better question...who would be the one to determine who is mad ?






A board of doctors.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Man this thread reeks of desperation

So Putin is such a wrench in your western US NATO world domination

That you fantasize about magical UN ordering Putin to retire

Russian people approve of their president and they don't give a piece of rotten apple what you think



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Here cry me a river

"Americans see Putin as only slightly more imminent threat than Obama, poll says"

blogs.reuters.com...



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Such a law would be sadly be misused for political agendas and power seeking goals and a step forward to One World Government.
If there is a leader who is a nutcase, it's up to citizens do they follow this madman or step forward against him.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

Putin is probably the only sane honest world leader in power.... Don't know what you have been reading ???



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

The problem with creating international standards as to what constitutes madness, is that what seems utterly reasonable to you and I, might seem completely insane to person from elsewhere, and in turn, things that appear mental to us, might seem reasonable to people from other lands. But of course, there are some things which a leader might do, which simply fly in the face of every human beings crazy meter.

But then we come to the real crux of the problem. Narcissism.

There is no such thing as a world leader without an over inflated view of his or her own importance. There are no people walking the world today, who have great power, and do not have personality traits bordering on the psychotic. The only difference between the leadership of North Korea, and the leadership of the western societies for example, is that the leaders of western nations often hide their psychopathic, domination obsessed tendencies behind economic savagery, and outrageously effective propaganda, rather than just butchering vast numbers of their own citizens, which is still mad, but slightly more honest in my view.

Basically, David Cameron, Obama, the leaders of hue he European powers, all of these individuals either were, or have become insane, the more power they have gained, and to rise to presidency or hold prime minister status in any nation, is to attain the MOST power, is to be the Alpha nutcase in a given region.

No sane person would ever consider themselves capable of doing the job! It is as simple as that!



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   
In the past regime change in oil rich countries has been achieved by saying "This is not about oil!" and then invading and allowing the countries own population to remove the hierarchy. Following that, the oil, that had nothing to do with the invasion and regime change, is brought under the control of those more sympathetic to the oil based economy, which is pure coincidence and had nothing at all to do with the decision to invade and facilitate regime change because "It was not about oil".

The fact that Vlad may have a few nukes that might still work that is probably the only thing preventing a "not about oil" invasion and regime change.

edit on 6-4-2015 by hotel1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

My first thought was that you were talking about Obama.

Guess we couldn't get that lucky.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Wirral Bagpuss

I am not sure what you are finding that makes Putin seem to be 'off',but it seems in his country they like him just fine.If anything,I think they would have tried to remove Bush during the second Iraq war if this was in place.The problem is,once man's ceiling is another man's floor.What may seem to be totally out there to one country,can be a normal response in that country. You can't just go removing leaders in other countries. Oh thats right,you must be an American.They like to do that all the time. Well,then in that case,just start up an NGO and have them start a revolution in that country.Our government does it all the time.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Nedusa

I live in Eastern Europe, part of it that Putin thinks is his. I have been watching him for a long time. He is anything but sane, in fact by all analysis of his actions he has gone "full psycho", far as I am concerned he and Obama are the two most dangerous men in the world. Obama because he has none and Putin because he thinks his are the size of those of a bull moose.

Also, If you started removing world leaders who are insane, you would have to replace about 99% of them. For the most part they are sociopaths, power hungry, devoid of emotion and in a position of power where they least belong.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join