Reason #152364 why the UN is a joke

[KRC]

United Nations Commission on Disarmament on Tuesday elected Iran as deputy for Asian nations.

 

...

 

The UN Commission on Disarmament which is subsidiary organ of the General Assembly will review disarmament and international security.

 

Linky Thingy

 

 

What, was the DPRK unavailable?

[GG]

Oops. I got my numbers confused. I thought you were talking about UN and its action in Sudan & Chad.

 

"

The Secretary-General is deeply concerned by the recent intensification of fighting along Chad’s eastern border with Sudan’s Darfur region and the extension of the armed confrontations to the southern borders with the Central African Republic. He observes that the increased violence is heightening political tensions in Chad and that its spillover effect is undermining international efforts to contribute to the stabilization of the situations in neighbouring Darfur and the Central African Republic. He strongly condemns the attacks against refugee camps in southern Chad and stresses the need to respect the safety and dignity of refugees and internally displaced persons.

 

The Secretary-General also firmly condemns the killing in northern Central African Republic of two doctors on a mission supported by the United Nations system to deliver vital medical assistance to thousands of civilians trapped by the worsening violence in that part of the country. He calls on the authorities for swift action to bring those responsible for the killings to justice."

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

The Secretary-General also firmly condemns the killing in northern Central African Republic of two doctors on a mission supported by the United Nations system to deliver vital medical assistance to thousands of civilians trapped by the worsening violence in that part of the country.  He calls on the authorities for swift action to bring those responsible for the killings to justice."

664487[/snapback]

 

Uhhhh...what? What authorities?

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Linky Thingy

What, was the DPRK unavailable? 

664475[/snapback]

 

 

You forgot the best part...

 

 

NAM member states issued a statement on the first day of the annual meeting calling on nuclear states to respect their commitments of demolishing their nuclear arms.

 

They also called on Israel to sign up to NPT and give access to all its nuclear sites for monitoring by UN nuclear agency.

 

Iran's elected as a deputy in an organization that declares Israel should open nuclear program to inspection? I can't decide if that's highly ironic or highly transparent...

[chicot]

Linky Thingy

What, was the DPRK unavailable? 

664475[/snapback]

 

Would you say the same thing if the UK, US or France, for example, were to be elected deputies? Somehow I think not.

[VABills]

Linky Thingy

What, was the DPRK unavailable? 

664475[/snapback]

No they are heading the commission.

[KRC]

You forgot the best part...

Iran's elected as a deputy in an organization that declares Israel should open nuclear program to inspection?  I can't decide if that's highly ironic or highly transparent... 

664497[/snapback]

 

I figured that was a another thread.

 

Does the U.N. even realize how ridiculous they are by doing things like this? Combine that with their complete ineptitude to handle things like:

 

DPRK

Haiti

Sudan

Congo

Iraq

The jury is still out on Iran, but it is not looking good.

 

All of this just recently.

 

Why the hell should they be taken seriously?

[VABills]

Why the hell should they be taken seriously?

664561[/snapback]

 

Obviously you haven't hung around there. They throw some awesome parties. I mean some real humdingers. That alone should keep them in business.

[KRC]

Would you say the same thing if the UK, US or France, for example, were to be elected deputies? Somehow I think not.

664500[/snapback]

 

If you do not see the hypocrisy of the U.N. telling Iran that they need to disarm and then putting them in the number two spot for the Disarmament Commision, then there is not much else to discuss.

[chicot]

If you do not see the hypocrisy of the U.N. telling Iran that they need to disarm and then putting them in the number two spot for the Disarmament Commision, then there is not much else to discuss.

664566[/snapback]

 

I can see that but I can also see a whole lot more hypocrisy. Like nuclear armed countries that have no intention of getting rid of their weapons crying foul when other countries follow their example. The US and UK have both signed up to the non-profileration treaty. Contrary to popular belief, this is not just concerned with preventing countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. It also specifies that the nuclear powers should move towards full nuclear disarmament. I don't see much sign of that. Do you not find it hypocritical that countries that are themselves renaging on their commitments to this treaty are the ones leading the charge against Iran for doing the same thing?

[HereComesTheReignAgain]

I can see that but I can also see a whole lot more hypocrisy. Like nuclear armed countries that have no intention of getting rid of their weapons crying foul when other countries follow their example. The US and UK have both signed up to the non-profileration treaty. Contrary to popular belief, this is not just concerned with preventing countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. It also specifies that the nuclear powers should move towards full nuclear disarmament. I don't see much sign of that.  Do you not find it hypocritical that countries that are themselves renaging on their commitments to this treaty are the ones leading the charge against Iran for doing the same thing?

664593[/snapback]

 

 

If a little hypocrisy keeps me from being irradiated by some lunatic muslims, I say pin the label on me now.

[KRC]

The US and UK have both signed up to the non-profileration treaty. Contrary to popular belief, this is not just concerned with preventing countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. It also specifies that the nuclear powers should move towards full nuclear disarmament. I don't see much sign of that. 

664593[/snapback]

 

I am fully aware of what is in the NPT.

 

According to the U.S. State Department:

 

-The U.S. has eliminated almost 90% of their non-strategic nuclear stockpile.

 

-The U.S. has eliminated over 13,000 nuclear weapons since 1988.

 

-The U.S. is on pace to reduce 50-80% of their strategic nuclear stockpile by 2012.

 

-In September of 2005, it was announced (through the Megatons for Megawatts program) that the equivalent of 10,000 warheads of Russian HEU was converted to LEU for U.S. nuclear reactors at the cost of the U.S.

 

-The U.S. only has one nuclear enrichment facility left in the country (in KY, I believe).

 

-From 1994 through 1997, the United States eliminated nearly 1000 strategic nuclear missiles and bombers, and reductions continue.

 

-The United States has removed nuclear weapons from all surface ships and attack submarines, and NATO has reduced the number of types of nuclear systems in Europe from five in 1991 to just one today.

 

-The number of NATO storage sites for NSNW has been reduced by 80 percent.

 

-The United States has withdrawn worldwide and eliminated more than 3000 tactical nuclear warheads, consisting of artillery shells, warheads for short-range missile systems, and Navy depth bombs.

 

-Completing fulfillment of the U.S. commitments made under the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives (PNIS), the last of these 3000-plus warheads were dismantled in 2003.

 

-The United States has removed 34 tons of plutonium and 174 tons of highly enriched uranium from its military stockpile, placed some of this material under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, and converted approximately 60 tons of this material to civil reactor fuel.

 

-The United States has not produced highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear weapons since 1964, and production of plutonium for nuclear weapons was halted in 1988.

 

-All U.S. plutonium production reactors at Hanford and Savannah River have been shut down. The Oak Ridge K-25 plant was completely closed in 1987.

 

-The United States ceased HEU production for any purposes at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in 1992.

 

-The overall U.S. nuclear weapons production infrastructure has been significantly downsized since the end of the Cold War.

 

 

 

 

It looks like we have different definitions of "I do not see much sign of that."

 

Just an FYI: The NPT does not prohibit nuclear weapons states from modernizing their nuclear forces. All of the nuclear weapons states have continued to modernize their nuclear weapons stockpiles during the period in which the NPT has been in effect.

[chicot]

I am fully aware of what is in the NPT.

 

According to the U.S. State Department:

 

-The U.S. has eliminated almost 90% of their non-strategic nuclear stockpile.

 

-The U.S. has eliminated over 13,000 nuclear weapons since 1988.

 

-The U.S. is on pace to reduce 50-80% of their strategic nuclear stockpile by 2012. 

 

-In September of 2005, it was announced (through the Megatons for Megawatts program) that the equivalent of 10,000 warheads of Russian HEU was converted to LEU for U.S. nuclear reactors at the cost of the U.S.

 

-The U.S. only has one nuclear enrichment facility left in the country (in KY, I believe).

 

-From 1994 through 1997, the United States eliminated nearly 1000 strategic nuclear missiles and bombers, and reductions continue. 

 

-The United States has removed nuclear weapons from all surface ships and attack submarines, and NATO has reduced the number of types of nuclear systems in Europe from five in 1991 to just one today.

 

-The number of NATO storage sites for NSNW has been reduced by 80 percent.

 

-The United States has withdrawn worldwide and eliminated more than 3000 tactical nuclear warheads, consisting of artillery shells, warheads for short-range missile systems, and Navy depth bombs.

 

-Completing fulfillment of the U.S. commitments made under the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives (PNIS), the last of these 3000-plus warheads were dismantled in 2003.

 

-The United States has removed 34 tons of plutonium and 174 tons of highly enriched uranium from its military stockpile, placed some of this material under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, and converted approximately 60 tons of this material to civil reactor fuel.

 

-The United States has not produced highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear weapons since 1964, and production of plutonium for nuclear weapons was halted in 1988.

 

-All U.S. plutonium production reactors at Hanford and Savannah River have been shut down. The Oak Ridge K-25 plant was completely closed in 1987.

 

-The United States ceased HEU production for any purposes at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in 1992.

 

-The overall U.S. nuclear weapons production infrastructure has been significantly downsized since the end of the Cold War.

It looks like we have different definitions of "I do not see much sign of that."

 

Just an FYI: The NPT does not prohibit nuclear weapons states from modernizing their nuclear forces. All of the nuclear weapons states have continued to modernize their nuclear weapons stockpiles during the period in which the NPT has been in effect.

664698[/snapback]

 

But do you honestly believe that the US has any intention of achieving complete nuclear disarmament? Call me a cynic, but I am very sceptical that this will happen in the foreseeable future.

[GG]

I can see that but I can also see a whole lot more hypocrisy. Like nuclear armed countries that have no intention of getting rid of their weapons crying foul when other countries follow their example. The US and UK have both signed up to the non-profileration treaty. Contrary to popular belief, this is not just concerned with preventing countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. It also specifies that the nuclear powers should move towards full nuclear disarmament. I don't see much sign of that.  Do you not find it hypocritical that countries that are themselves renaging on their commitments to this treaty are the ones leading the charge against Iran for doing the same thing?

664593[/snapback]

 

The difference in the level of hypocrisy is that in the 50 years of nukes held by westernized nations, they have not been used since their devastating power was proven in 1945. I don't think anyone would realistically say that Iran would use the same discretion.

[KRC]

But do you honestly believe that the US has any intention of achieving complete nuclear disarmament? Call me a cynic, but I am very sceptical that this will happen in the foreseeable future.

664707[/snapback]

 

It depends on what happens with the rest of the world. Allow the DPRK and Iran to develop nuclear weapons, then no.

 

That fact is that the U.S. is working towards the goal. There is no way that it will happen in the foreseeable future because of the size of the programs built up during the Cold War.

 

Where we differ is that the U.S. is working towards elimination. Iran and the DPRK are going in the opposite direction. It is not hypocritical to push other countries in the same direction as the U.S., which is elimination of nuclear programs.

[SilverNRed]

But do you honestly believe that the US has any intention of achieving complete nuclear disarmament? Call me a cynic, but I am very sceptical that this will happen in the foreseeable future.

664707[/snapback]

I sure as hell hope not.

[SilverNRed]

Linky Thingy

What, was the DPRK unavailable? 

664475[/snapback]

I actually had this as Reason #152377, but then again it's tough to keep track these days.

[BB27]

I actually had this as Reason #152377, but then again it's tough to keep track these days.

665088[/snapback]

 

What I find odd is that you need 152377 reasons.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

I don't see what the problem is, I mean Iran can be counted upon to act rationally, right?

 

(you just KNOW I'm gonna harp on this, right, Tom....)