UN tells Israel to let in nuclear inspectors

[Dilange]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NNPT
Cold War USA and CCCP were signatories.
So, both Cold War USA and CCCP agreed to a future nuclear disarmament.

Pre-1968 CCCP and USA

[Khadgar]

So they openly need/have weapons that mustn't be revealed. I guess logic can fuck it self like the anti-semetic UN right?

Israel is the only nation under existential threat. They want a nuclear deterrent, there is no legal impediment to their having one, and they do.

Except of course in order for it to be a deterrent, you have to let everyone know you've got the big bomb. Israel is being coy about it because.. who the hell knows.

[Al-Faisal]

No, thus is the way they make the world work.

Yes, individuals should probably also be held to contracts they don't sign, just like countries should be held to treaties they didn't ratify. Speaking of which, you owe me $5000 paid over 10 years at 2% interest because it is a contract and it doesn't matter whether you signed it or not.

It's amusing that you view such an ignorant analogy as related at all to one undeclared nuclear power dictating to another whether it should develop such weapons.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Israel never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it has every right to use nuclear weapons and has no legal demand to not build nukes. So Israel should give the UN the finger and tell them to go to hell.

what? why? why the fuck should any nation on this stone be held unaccountable for their actions with devices that can have a dramatic effect on thousands upon thousands of people not to mention the very terrain they are rooted to?

i'm noting you said should implying the decision of having a violent expansionist state being unaccountable for its incredibly dangerous arsenal is like morally correct?

Because they have no political obligation. Israel can build all the nukes it wants, so can Pakistan, India, and North Korea, and the UN has no right to stop them. If Syria or Iran don't like Israel with nukes they can feel free to intervene, just like South Korea or the US can feel free to intervene if they are worried about DPRK getting nukes, but the UN has no business in this matter at all. Israel, DPRK, India, and Pakistan having nukes should be dealt with on a state by state basis.

[Al-Faisal]

More of the UN screwing Israel over... great...

Yes, how dare the UN meddle in something it created.

[Oterro]

More of the UN screwing Israel over... great...

i literally hope they fire a nuclear missile at iran and the middle east shuts down and everyone loses their oil and no one has petrol and all the americans who'd lick the spit from israel's cutlery starve to death because they cant go out and buy disgusting food and on their gravestones i can engrave ''more of israel screwing everyone over...great...''

[Kummen]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/04/un-tells-israel-nuclear-inspectors

The UN general assembly has overwhelmingly approved a resolution calling on Israel to open its nuclear programme for inspection.
The resolution, approved by a vote of 174 to six with six abstentions, calls on Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) "without further delay" and open its nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Those voting against were Israel, the US, Canada, Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau.
Resolutions adopted by the 193-member general assembly are not legally binding but they do reflect world opinion and carry moral and political weight. And the resolution adds to pressure on Israel as it faces criticism over plans to increase settlement in the West Bank, a move seen as retaliation for the assembly recognising Palestinian statehood.

Israel refuses to confirm or deny possessing nuclear bombs though it is widely believed to have them. It has refused to join the non-proliferation treaty along with three nuclear weapon states: India, Pakistan and North Korea.

I think this is a good move. Israel wants Iran to follow NPT, then it should do so itself. I find it hard to believe anyone could be opposed to this. I know Israel will ignore it, like they do most of the time with the UN unless it's over something they want, but it is good the world is critical of Israel and is watching.

What do you think?

I say that it's not good. At all. And here's why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpXMe_R2BZk&hd=1

[Dilange]

what? why? why the fuck should any nation on this stone be held unaccountable for their actions with devices that can have a dramatic effect on thousands upon thousands of people not to mention the very terrain they are rooted to?

i'm noting you said should implying the decision of having a violent expansionist state being unaccountable for its incredibly dangerous arsenal is like morally correct?

Because they have no political obligation. Israel can build all the nukes it wants, so can Pakistan, India, and North Korea, and the UN has no right to stop them. If Syria or Iran don't like Israel with nukes they can feel free to intervene, just like South Korea or the US can feel free to intervene if they are worried about DPRK getting nukes, but the UN has no business in this matter at all. Israel, DPRK, India, and Pakistan having nukes should be dealt with on a state by state basis.

You're forgetting any intervention of Israel, will be personally dealt with by the United States. So, literally, if you fuck with Israel, prepare to fuck with the United States of 'Merica.

[Oterro]

Because they have no political obligation.

i have no political obligation to feed a dying man by the road side, nor legal, i mean is specifically made the second half of the post because i knew you'd say ''because they don't have to!!''

[Dilange]

More of the UN screwing Israel over... great...

i literally hope they fire a nuclear missile at iran and the middle east shuts down and everyone loses their oil and no one has petrol and all the americans who'd lick the spit from israel's cutlery starve to death because they cant go out and buy disgusting food and on their gravestones i can engrave ''more of israel screwing everyone over...great...''

That almost happened in the 1973 energy crisis after America supported Israel in the Yom Kippur War. But if the Arab nations, had literally no brain cells to do this, then NATO, the EU, South America, Oceania, and China would say hello personally to those fucks from the inside of their tanks.

[Dilange]

Because they have no political obligation.

i have no political obligation to feed a dying man by the road side, nor legal, i mean is specifically made the second half of the post because i knew you'd say ''because they don't have to!!''

Nice strawman arguemet that has nothing to do with the issue. Israel has no obligation to allow UN dictate what they can do with their nuclear power or weapons.

[Thenions Immaculate Kin]

Israel is the only nation under existential threat. They want a nuclear deterrent, there is no legal impediment to their having one, and they do.

Except of course in order for it to be a deterrent, you have to let everyone know you've got the big bomb. Israel is being coy about it because.. who the hell knows.

Israel's being coy because they get deterrent value anyway, without as much political cost. Few are willing to risk that Israel does have nukes, but without openly claiming them Israel can hold a less costly political position.

[Sdaeriji]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

So they openly need/have weapons that mustn't be revealed. I guess logic can fuck it self like the anti-semetic UN right?

Israel's policy of refusing to comment on their nuclear capability or lack thereof actually makes a lot of geopolitical sense. It allows them to retain a deterrent against weapons of mass destruction; it provides an excuse for Arab leaders who don't want to attack Israel but face domestic pressure to do so; and by being on paper non-nuclear, it allows Arab nations not to feel pressured into pursuing their own nuclear capabilities. If Israel ever went public with their arsenal, you could virtually guarantee that at least Syria and Iran would withdraw from the NPT, and probably Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well.

[Dyakovo]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

I cannot tell if you're being very sarcastic and amusing, or demonstrating extreme ignorance of the UN and flamebaiting.

The latter.

[Al-Faisal]

They should do it, but not because the UN says so.

Why then?

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Yes, individuals should probably also be held to contracts they don't sign, just like countries should be held to treaties they didn't ratify. Speaking of which, you owe me $5000 paid over 10 years at 2% interest because it is a contract and it doesn't matter whether you signed it or not.

It's amusing that you view such an ignorant analogy as related at all to one undeclared nuclear power dictating to another whether it should develop such weapons.

Fine then, how about this, we should search Iran for cluster munitions since some countries signed a treaty banning them, which Iran never agreed to. Besides, conventional munitions killed hundreds times as many people as nuclear munitions. You see, there is this concept of Mutually Assured Destruction, which has thus far been accurate, in which a country with nukes will never use its nukes for fear of retribution. So now tell me, why would Israel, a country that has likely had nukes for years and faced numerous threats over that time would be the first country to ignore this idea suddenly?

[Chinamerica]

I support Israel, but they should only let in nuclear inspectors if Iran does the same.

Hans Blix time!

[Souseiseki]

i have no political obligation to feed a dying man by the road side, nor legal, i mean is specifically made the second half of the post because i knew you'd say ''because they don't have to!!''

Nice strawman arguemet that has nothing to do with the issue. Israel has no obligation to allow UN dictate what they can do with their nuclear power or weapons.

if pakistan started trying to share weapons with iran how would you feel about that

just curious

i ask because it's the closest thing i can get to to sharing nuclear weapons with south africa

i mean obviously we have no right to complain about things like nuclear proliferation but

[Gun Manufacturers]

spoilers: they will say refuse and the U.S. and the posters on this forum will back them up and then go back to chanting BOMB IRAN

While I am certain many posters here support Israel's right to exist, I am also certain most of those same posters would agree Israel needs to be open with their nuclear program if they expect Iran to be.

Iran is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereas Israel isn't. The situations are different. If Israel was also a member of the NNPT, then I would expect them to follow the treaty the same way I expect Iran or any other treaty member to.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

So they openly need/have weapons that mustn't be revealed. I guess logic can fuck it self like the anti-semetic UN right?

Israel's policy of refusing to comment on their nuclear capability or lack thereof actually makes a lot of geopolitical sense. It allows them to retain a deterrent against weapons of mass destruction; it provides an excuse for Arab leaders who don't want to attack Israel but face domestic pressure to do so; and by being on paper non-nuclear, it allows Arab nations not to feel pressured into pursuing their own nuclear capabilities. If Israel ever went public with their arsenal, you could virtually guarantee that at least Syria and Iran would withdraw from the NPT, and probably Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well.

I have zero problems with a nuclear Saudi Arabia, sure it isn't the most egaltarian country, but it is certainly far more stable than most of the Middle East. That is part of the reason I prefer Israel to Iran, Syria, and Palestine, Israel has yet to face a military coup or a popular revolt, it has been stable since its formation, much like Turkey has for about 100 years and Saudi Arabia has been since its creation.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I disagree with the goals of the NPT in the first place.
Israel only wants Iran to be forced to join it because they can't just storm over there and be sure it's not going on themselves. Unlike America, Israel really can't get away with pulling an Iraq.

[Dyakovo]

More of the UN screwing Israel over... great...

How would this "screw over" Israel?

[Souseiseki]

More of the UN screwing Israel over... great...

How would this "screw over" Israel?

if you don't support israels right to do whatever the hell they want where they want when they want you're screwing israel over and are basically setting up the stage for a second holocaust

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Nice strawman arguemet that has nothing to do with the issue. Israel has no obligation to allow UN dictate what they can do with their nuclear power or weapons.

if pakistan started trying to share weapons with iran how would you feel about that

just curious

i ask because it's the closest thing i can get to to sharing nuclear weapons with south africa

i mean obviously we have no right to complain about things like nuclear proliferation but

Pakistani, Iranian and North Korean nuclear scientists are all believed to have at some point collaborated with each other in furtherance of each nation's nuclear programme.

[IshCong]

I disagree with the goals of the NPT in the first place.
Israel only wants Iran to be forced to join it because they can't just storm over there and be sure it's not going on themselves. Unlike America, Israel really can't get away with pulling an Iraq.

Iran already joined, some time ago (signed in '68, ratified in '70). Israel never has. Iran, since joining the NNPT, has violated it on occasion, which has led to some political backlash against Iran.