dave742 on November 28, 2009 at 10:27 PM

you’re a typical talking-point liberal troll..and an anti-semitic one to boot.

what a waste of space.

Obama did kill the RRW program:

so now we have more unreliable nuclear weapons? oh thats great! right..

If you think Article VI envisioned still having thousands of nuclear warheads 45 years into the future, then you are disingenuous. Not a surprise. Everyone on the planet knows that the US and othe NWS have ignored the NPT, and the NNWS are getting tired of it. Koplow’s article is dated, but he talks about the results of the US and others ignoring the treaty:

thats YOUR interpretation of the treaty. its not what it says….you’ve been lying about this treaty from the start, as you’ve been lying about everything else you post. There is no timetable, no numeric requirements…just a vague, ‘lets negotiate’ and you can’t negotiate with people like Iran, OBVIOUSLY….at least obviously to anyone but an iranian propogandist like you.

who cares who Koplow says? he’s a left-wing hack, like you. and why should the US rescue the treaty?

you have ignored every question I have asked, you are unable to hold an intelligent conversation. all you can do is post talking points.

So far, the NPT has survived, but as long as the US and others ignore it, eventually the NNWS will also ignore it, and more and more countries will develop nukes. The blame for this will be on the NWS, for not honoring the treaty for decades. One side of a treaty will not abide by it forever while the other side ignores it.

the only reason the NPT exists at all is because the US has upheld it. in your twisted little worldview the US is always the bad guy. but you are unconcerned about Iran gettting nuclear weapons and killing us, or killing the jews, in fact you applaud killing jews. you don’t want us to pre-emptively strike iran, even though it may save millions of our lives.

again, you are a sick, twisted liar.

so the Russians have deployed a new NUCLEAR MISSILE..I’m sure you’re outraged and will denounce the russians immediately, right davey boy?

The Russians are also in violation of the NPT. Their mobile TOPOL missiles replace old versions, and their deployment conforms to existing arms control treaties.

so what new nuclear missiles are we working on davey?

Obama did kill the RRW program:
“Consistent with President Obama’s campaign promises to oppose development of new nuclear weapons, the passback document calls zeroing out all funding for the reliable replacement warhead (RRW) and cutting back other nuclear weapons programs aimed at expanding the nation’s nuclear arsenal or production capacity.”
Of course, he now seems to be changing his mind:
“Obama will propose updating America’s aging nuclear-weapons manufacturing complex and funding design work that would tiptoe to the very edge of crafting a new warhead”
Another link.

we signed a treaty that said we would NEGOTIATE in good faith to reduce nuclear weapons

If you think Article VI envisioned still having thousands of nuclear warheads 45 years into the future, then you are disingenuous. Not a surprise. Everyone on the planet knows that the US and othe NWS have ignored the NPT, and the NNWS are getting tired of it. Koplow’s article is dated, but he talks about the results of the US and others ignoring the treaty:

“At the same time, the NPT is in serious trouble. The NNWS have tolerated its inequality for over two decades, and their patience is wearing thin. Many have condemned it as discriminatory, outraged that the NWS have not done more to fulfill the article VI commitment, especially regarding CTBT. The implied threats about NNWS withdrawal and about termination (or only short extension) in 1995 must be taken more seriously. An increasing number of NNWS may come to agree with the NWS negotiator who, years ago, described the NPT as one of the “greatest con games of modern times.” Certainly, the efforts to enhance and strengthen the NPT verification regime have already proven problematic. Only by promptly fulfilling its obligations in good faith can the United States rescue the NPT and avoid the disintegration of the global non-proliferation campaign, at a time when much better outcomes are now attainable and urgent.”

So far, the NPT has survived, but as long as the US and others ignore it, eventually the NNWS will also ignore it, and more and more countries will develop nukes. The blame for this will be on the NWS, for not honoring the treaty for decades. One side of a treaty will not abide by it forever while the other side ignores it.

and of course no outrage at iran trying to get a nuclear bomb, and kill the jews…and no outrage from davey boy about them hiding their activities, and stiffing the IAEA.

During a press
conference with foreign
media on January 31,
2006, Putin described
the weapon as “a new
missile system that as
yet has no equivalent
anywhere else in the
world.” Putin said he
shared the principles of
the system with French
President Jacques Chirac
at a military space
facility in Russia, adding
that the weapon
“is not a response to
ABM systems, because
it does not matter to
these missiles whether
there is an ABM system
in place or not, for, as
I have said, they operate
at hypersonic speed
and can change their
trajectory both in terms
of course and altitude.

so what new nuclear missiles are we working on davey? when was the last time we deployed a new nuclear missile?

your statement about the russians is a laughable lie.

got any more good ones??

The
most significant development in 2006
was the deployment of the Topol-
M1, the road-mobile version of the
single-warhead Topol-M (NATO designation
SS-27). The Topol-M1 will

so the Russians have deployed a new NUCLEAR MISSILE..I’m sure you’re outraged and will denounce the russians immediately, right davey boy?

how can you have this when a country like Iran does the following?

VIENNA (AP) – The International Atomic Energy Agency probe of Iran’s nuclear program is at a dead end because Tehran is not cooperating, the chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said Thursday in an unusually blunt expression of frustration four days before he leaves office.

try to answer this question davey boy.

hat other country has cut its nuclear weapons as much? hmmm??

Russia.

really now?

An additional
9,300 warheads are believed to be in
reserve or awaiting dismantlement, for
a total Russian stockpile of approximately
15,000 nuclear warheads.

wrong again…

link

do you ever have any facts to back up what you say? just curious.

The point is, we signed a treaty that said we would have zero warheads “at an early date.

we signed a treaty that said we would NEGOTIATE in good faith to reduce nuclear weapons…again you are a liar.

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

we have done that, we have pursued negotiations good faith, we have pursued disarmament. but you cannot disarm when people like iran and NK and china are still nuclear threats.

where is your outrage at these countries? oh but they’re trying to kill jews, or are OK with that, so you defend them.

I enjoy exposing your lies…and I notice you cannot respond to any of my questions or points. you cannot go beyond talking points…typical left-wing wacko.

what other country has cut its nuclear weapons as much? hmmm??

Russia. They are the other signatory to the START/SORT treaties. I said we have 10,000 warheads, you say 9,938. Fine. We can use your number. The point is, we signed a treaty that said we would have zero warheads “at an early date.” You say that we will have 5,000 warhead by 2012, but “under current plans, dismantling the backlog of retired warheads will take until 2023.” (your link) So we will still have them, but we just won’t count them. So let’s say we have 5,000 after 45 years. When do we get to zero? 200 years? 1,000 years? One million years? Do you consider any of these numbers to be “an early date”?

its been fun exposing you, and making a fool out of you.

You really schooled me.

right4life;
You’re funny.

dave742 on November 28, 2009 at 6:47 AM

you’re a sick evil liar. its been fun exposing you, and making a fool out of you.

Putting a cap on nuclear weapons is not “complete disarmament.” After 40 years, the US still has 10,000 total warheads. For any sentient being, this does not constitute “good faith.”

dave742 on November 28, 2009 at 8:05 AM

you are a liar.

The Bush administration announced in 2004 that it had decided to cut the nuclear weapons stockpile “nearly in half” by 2012, but has refused to disclose the actual numbers. Yet a fact sheet published by the Federation of American Scientists and Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that the stockpile will decline from approximately 9,938 warheads today to approximately 5,047 warheads by the end of 2012.

link

what other country has cut its nuclear weapons as much? hmmm?? and since we are cutting nuclear weapons, why is Iran and NK trying to get them?

again, you are a liar.

Yes, we have. The 2002 Nuclear Posture Review threatens a first, nuclear strike against Iran. Hillary has threatened to “obliterate” Iran. If Iran were to obtain nuclear weapons, and then threatened to “obliterate” the US, you would consider it a nuclear threat. It works the same both ways.

I looked at that nuclear posture review..I didn’t find the word ‘iran’ in it. no wonder you can’t quote it. you are a liar.

Hillary was a candidate when she said that, not a government official. Obliterate can mean many things, and as the world has seen in places like Tokyo in WWII, we don’t need to nuke something to obliterate it. you are a liar.

A Lexis search gives 547 articles that talk about “US pressure” being used to stop any work on Iran’s nuclear power plans. 547 incidents of a breach of the NPT by the US. The US is obliged to aid the Iranian nuclear power plans, not hinder them.

you’re a liar. the NPT talks about peaceful nuclear power…Iran is using nuclear power to get a bomb, to use against us the jews.

its because you want to an other genocide of the jews isn’t it? thats why you support iran getting a bomb.

you said we threatened to NUKE IRAN..

Yes, we have. The 2002 Nuclear Posture Review threatens a first, nuclear strike against Iran. Hillary has threatened to “obliterate” Iran. If Iran were to obtain nuclear weapons, and then threatened to “obliterate” the US, you would consider it a nuclear threat. It works the same both ways.

[The US does everything possible to hinder Iran’s capability to develop nuclear power] what have we done?

We have worked for decades to stop Iran’s nuclear power plans:

“Mr. Pierre Villaros, a French engineer on the IAEA team, went as far as “deploring that Iran is under a de facto embargo on nuclear equipments.”…”What we do want,” Amrollahi says, “is to complete two units of 1,200 megawatts each on the site of the southern city of Bushehr. Work on those units began under the imperial regime. We have already paid the Germans for those two reactors but they have told us they are under US pressure not to finish the job.”"
Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA)
February 18, 1993, Thursday

A Lexis search gives 547 articles that talk about “US pressure” being used to stop any work on Iran’s nuclear power plans. 547 incidents of a breach of the NPT by the US. The US is obliged to aid the Iranian nuclear power plans, not hinder them.

ever hear of the START treaty?

From the Koplow article:

The rest of the world was immediately supportive of these efforts and pleased that the pressures and interests reflected in article VI were producing such prompt results. And — jumping ahead in the chronology — the international community has continued to be a keen observer and a grateful supporter whenever the superpowers have been able to lurch toward a strategic arms accord. n178 But there was never any suggestion that the partial success of the SALT n179 and START n180 [*343] talks could fully discharge the article VI commitment.

Putting a cap on nuclear weapons is not “complete disarmament.” After 40 years, the US still has 10,000 total warheads. For any sentient being, this does not constitute “good faith.”

They did not hide the Qom facility, they reported it earlier than they were required to.

they hid qom, and did not report it. you are a liar.

I do. If you would like to discuss it, let me know. The US certainly does not care about what is legal, because they are a rogue nation. Rogue nations do not care about the law, or treaties that they sign.

dave742 on November 27, 2009 at 1:37 PM

the US has not violated any treaty and is not a rogue nation…you are a liar.

Article IV(2)says nothing about giving nuclear material to anyone. Since you are unable to even read a document, I will simply post Article IV(2) here:

All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

The US has violated this article

the us has NOT violated this…you are a liar.

1) The US threatens to attack Iran using nuclear weapons

we have not done this. you are a liar.

4) The US does nothing for 30 years regarding disarming their nuclear weapons, and works in the opposite direction and develops new nuclear weapons (a clear violation of Article VI on the NPT. I am sure sanctions against the US will begin soon).

ever hear of the START treaty? you are a liar.

Or should they try to think past the propaganda?

dave742 on November 27, 2009 at 10:02 PM

its real easy to think past your propoganda.

and its real easy to make you look like a fool. not that you need any help…

Fine. Hillary’s quote was directed towards Iran. Making a stupid comment about her statement is not the same as addressing it. I mentioned the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review. It talks about a first strike threat against 7 countries. Do you have any doubt that Iran is one of them?

you said we threatened to NUKE IRAN..you ‘sir’ are a liar. plain and simple. and I have shown you be a liar, over and over and over again in this thread.

you have been unable to address any point I have raised, all you can do is ignore, and excuse, the iranian drive towards a nuclear bomb.

if they get it, and with people like you around they will, I hope they use it wherever you live…and you watch your friends and family die. scum like you deserve the results of your beliefs. you are sick, twisted and evil.

Then please explain to me what article VI is about.

its a NON PROLIFERATION TREATY not a disarmament treaty..how hard is this?

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

lets see the russians the chinese are building new nuclear weapons…and you want us to disarm..where are the good faith negotiations on the part of the russians and the chinese, and the iranians, and the north koreans, and the syrians? your statements that we are violating this treaty are a lie…like everything else you have said.

again you are a piece of trash. you don’t deserve the freedom others have died to give you.

oh and I’m glad we nuked japan, aren’t you?

can’t keep your lies straight now can you? when did we threaten IRAN???

Fine. Hillary’s quote was directed towards Iran. Making a stupid comment about her statement is not the same as addressing it. I mentioned the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review. It talks about a first strike threat against 7 countries. Do you have any doubt that Iran is one of them?

its not a disarmament treaty at all

Then please explain to me what article VI is about.

YiZhangZhe:

International law is not determined by the law journals of the USA.

No. It is determined by a wide range of sources. These sources and issues are dealt with and addressed by authors who write articles in US law journals, however.

Sovereign nations do whatever they think is in their best interests

Yes, and if these actions do not conform with international law, eventually the rest of the world will dismiss them as rogue nations. If your only concern is acting in your best interest, then does that theory apply to individuals as well as nations? If one person sees another person on the street late at night, and there are no witnesses around, it is in that person’s best interest to crack the other person’s head open and take his wallet. Is that the way people, or nations, should behave? Or should we follow laws? If Hitler told German citizens that, even though there is no evidence that Poland is about to do anything to Germany, he “thinks” they are about to, and for that reasons Germans should support him in his attack on Poland, should they? Or should they try to think past the propaganda?

Otherwise, there is really no incentive for the Russians and Chinese to help us. They know that Iran and North Korea won’t use their nuclear weapons against them, so they prefer an outcome where both of those states have them. I get the impression that China and Russia take turns blocking any practical measures, such as sanctions, so they can both take turns extracting concessions from us in return for their (temporary) support.

It is not solely a disarmament treaty, but it is what I said it was. It was an agreement that NNWS would not develop nukes as long as NWS did what I listed above, including disarming. That is why Article VI exists. Start reading before talking, please.

its not a disarmament treaty at all…again you’re a liar.

What does Hillary mean when she speaks of “obliterating” Iran?

We threatened Saddam twice. First in 1991:

with Hillary she’s probably threating to unleash her thunder thighs on dinner jacket!!

And again in 2002. Threatening to use nukes, even in response to a chemical attack, is illegal.

now you’re lying again…this is what you said:

1) The US threatens to attack Iran using nuclear weapons

can’t keep your lies straight now can you? when did we threaten IRAN??? hmmmmm??

And again in 2002. Threatening to use nukes, even in response to a chemical attack, is illegal.

nope nothing about iran there…and who says its illegal?? you are so full of shit its laughable!!

WASHINGTON, Dec. 11 (UPI) — The White House threatened the use of nuclear weapons if the United States, its troops or allies were attacked with weapons of mass destruction. The plan was in a document, that included the use of pre-emptive strikes to keep WMD from being used against U.S. interests, sent Wednesday to Congress.