France Vows To Block UN Resolution on Iraq War

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap and Comrade Tribune, Do you or do you not support the elimination of nuclear weapons (and other weapons of mass destruction) from this planet?

I don´t. The US and Israel will *never* give up their weapons of mass destruction, so I am glad to hear their enemies acquire such weapons as well.

Fair is fair.

[Ozz]

Originally posted by GePap
If it is so irrelevant, perhaps you can find another thread to inhabit right now (ie. I think such statements add nothing to a discussion, just take up space between posts with issues, making it harder to find those among the dross).

No way, best posts on this thread, and the UN is closer
to topic than Non-proliferation Treaty.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Personally, I'd first make an example out of Iraq just to make the North Koreas & Irans of the world get a little nervious then I'd carrot & stick them into giving up their nukes.

Iraq is an example of what can happen to you if you don´t possess Nuclear Weapons. North Korea has been more far-sighted, it seems.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by GePap
If it is so irrelevant, perhaps you can find another thread to inhabit right now (ie. I think such statements add nothing to a discussion, just take up space between posts with issues, making it harder to find those among the dross).

I'm sorry you don't enjoy reading my posts Gepap. But last I checked you weren't a moderator and I am writing about the current thread topic so I think I will respond if I feel I have something to contribute. You may feel free to skip over my posts if you think my posts just take up space.

Hopefully there is no hard feelings about that.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Is it fair for the big five to possess nuclear weapons yet prosue a policy which denies them to other states? No. Is it in our interests to do so? Most asuredly yes. Do we possess the financial, political, & military power to force other states into realizing it's in their interests not to build nuclear weapons? 9 times out of 10 yes but with North Korea we will see.

In the end it comes down to how much a government is willing to sacrifice in order to get those nukes. Personally, I'd first make an example out of Iraq just to make the North Koreas & Irans of the world get a little nervious then I'd carrot & stick them into giving up their nukes. There is nothing like a little Judus gold to oil the wheel.

Oerdin, The thing we in the United States should be most afraid of are WoMD, including nukes. 9/11 showed us just how vulnerable we are to sneak attacks. If our own (and Russia, France, UK, China, etc.) possession of nuclear weapons are causing others to seek them, we need to seek new rounds of mutual disarmament. We need to take the lead on this. In the words of many here and in the world, we should not be hypocrits.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Iraq is an example of what can happen to you if you don´t possess Nuclear Weapons. North Korea has been more far-sighted, it seems.

Comrade Tribune, are you actually in favor of nuclear weapons proliferation?

[SlowwHand]

Comrade Tribune is in favor of creating a stir.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Comrade Tribune, are you actually in favor of nuclear weapons proliferation?

You are actually taking him seriously?

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Ned
Comrade Tribune, are you actually in favor of nuclear weapons proliferation?

Of course. I felt much safer in the Cold War than now. MAD is a good thing.

[SlowwHand]

Make a deal with Hussein to take out Austria, he can walk free.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Make a deal with Hussein to take out Austria, he can walk free.

He won´t trust you. Your ambassador promised him non-interference with Kuwait; forget?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Of course. I felt much safer in the Cold War than now. MAD is a good thing.

MAD depended critically upon both sides having responsible leaders.

The effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons assumes that irresponsible leaders can and do exist, and the more nations that have the weapons, the more likely that an irresponsible leader will actually start a nuclear war.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Ned


MAD depended critically upon both sides having responsible leaders.

But the Soviets were blindsided by our secret weapon: Ronald Reagan. Yeah!

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Ned
MAD depended critically upon both sides having responsible leaders.

The effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons assumes that irresponsible leaders can and do exist, and the more nations that have the weapons, the more likely that an irresponsible leader will actually start a nuclear war.

The most irresponsible leaders are American leaders. This proves that MAD works.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap and Comrade Tribune, Do you or do you not support the elimination of nuclear weapons (and other weapons of mass destruction) from this planet?

I do support getting rid of WMD, just as I support an end to world hunger, and end to War, and oppresion. Sadly, all of those aims are as equally likely to occur in the modern world.

The NPT won't bring and end to Nuclear weapons. The only way to do so would be to convince 198 differing, argumentative, selfish entities to agree that it is better that none of them have such "toys" because they are so dangerous. It won't happen. On what moral gorund can the US stand, demanding others get rid of nukes entirely, if itself is not wiling to do so? And how could it ever enforce such an act if it did get rid of them before others?

I'm sorry you don't enjoy reading my posts Gepap. But last I checked you weren't a moderator and I am writing about the current thread topic so I think I will respond if I feel I have something to contribute. You may feel free to skip over my posts if you think my posts just take up space.

Hopefully there is no hard feelings about that.

There is no hard feelings, only temporary frustration.

I do mean to ask you (or Drake):

You keep saying the UN is a faiure. OK: then whats the alternative? Do you support the creation of a supranational organization?