Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Right outta da box, let me say this: This is one of very, very few bills I can agree with. Nuclear is horrible in the war context, no doubt about it. As it stands now, I seriously doubt one side or the other is going to push that button, as annihilation is all but a given for the instigator as well as the enemy.
However, there is much, so much more to do before anyone disarms unilaterally across the board. Who does one "trust" to give in first? Let's say, just for instance, that the US and Iran agree to disarm. Who goes first? Us? Them? As a gesture of "good will?" Who is going to be granted the position of the middle man? China? Russia? North Korea?
I don't know the answer to any of my questions, that's why I posted them. I only know this: I doubt I will see a nuclear-free world in MY lifetime, but I can always pray for the same.
Enough of my thoughts. Here's what predicated it all:
Quote:
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - With President Barack Obama presiding over a historic session, the U.N. Security Council unanimously approved a U.S.-sponsored resolution Thursday committing all nations to work for a nuclear weapons-free world.
The resolution calls for stepped up efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, promote disarmament and "reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism." It calls for better security for nuclear weapons materials and underscores the Security Council's intention to take action if such material or nuclear weapons get into the hands of terrorists.
Sorry to bust your bubble... the nuclear non-proliferation act was passed in 1068... its been 40 years and we STILL have nuclear warheads... how long does it take to break down a few thousand warheads? Its talk and talk is cheap... If Obama really intends to disarm nuclear weapons then DO IT.. don't talk about it and see who moves, just DO IT... show the world that you mean it and they will do the same... but if you go and talk and talk and talk... they can say WHATEVER they want and do jack shhhht
Sorry to bust your bubble... the non-nuclear proliferation act was passed in 1068... its been 40 years and we STILL have nuclear warheads... how long does it take to break down a few thousand warheads? Its talk and talk is cheap... If Obama really intends to disarm nuclear weapons then DO IT.. don't talk about it and see who moves, just DO IT... show the world that you mean it and they will do the same... but if you go and talk and talk and talk... they can say WHATEVER they want and do jack shhhht
Right outta da box, let me say this: This is one of very, very few bills I can agree with. Nuclear is horrible in the war context, no doubt about it. As it stands now, I seriously doubt one side or the other is going to push that button, as annihilation is all but a given for the instigator as well as the enemy.
However, there is much, so much more to do before anyone disarms unilaterally across the board. Who does one "trust" to give in first? Let's say, just for instance, that the US and Iran agree to disarm. Who goes first? Us? Them? As a gesture of "good will?" Who is going to be granted the position of the middle man? China? Russia? North Korea?
I don't know the answer to any of my questions, that's why I posted them. I only know this: I doubt I will see a nuclear-free world in MY lifetime, but I can always pray for the same.
Enough of my thoughts. Here's what predicated it all:
IMO, who cares what the U.N. plans on doing, their resolutions seem to carry little weight these days....even the U.S. has ignored when it's not to our benefit to. They can't get the countries with veto authority to even agree on the resolutions they keep putting on N. Korea, who just ignores them any way and makes nuclear threats towards neighboring countries because of the resolutions (which is why they keep getting them in the first place).
Basically the UN has nothing to decide. It taskes treaties just as in the past between nations.Iran'nprth korea will not talk to amount to anyhtign especailly varifcation which is what they ended up skunking clinton on while continuing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
