UN calls on Israel to open nuclear facilities

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
fat chance...never happen ever...never...ever..never.....rofl...hahahahaahahaaaaaa




http://news.yahoo.com/un-calls-israel-open-nuclear-facilities-032837550.html

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. General Assembly has overwhelmingly approved a resolution calling on Israel to quickly open its nuclear program for inspection and backing a high-level conference to ban nuclear weapons from the Middle East which was just canceled.

All the Arab nations and Iran had planned to attend the conference in mid-December in Helsinki, Finland, but the United States announced on Nov. 23 that it wouldn't take place, citing political turmoil in the region and Iran's defiant stance on nonproliferation. Iran and some Arab nations countered that the real reason for the cancellation was Israel's refusal to attend.

The resolution, approved Monday by a vote of 174-6 with 6 abstentions, calls on Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty "without further delay" and open its nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Those voting "no" were Israel, the U.S., 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.

Israel refuses to confirm or deny it has nuclear bombs though it is widely believed to have a nuclear arsenal. It has refused to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NPT, along with three nuclear weapon states — India, Pakistan and North Korea.

The Arab proposal to create a weapons-of-mass-destruction-free zone in the Mideast, and to pressure Israel to give up its undeclared arsenal of perhaps 80 nuclear warheads, was endorsed at an NPT conference in 1995 but never acted on. In 2010, the 189 parties to the 1970 treaty called for convening a conference in 2012 on the establishment of a WMD-free zone in the Middle East.

The resolution, which was approved by the assembly's disarmament committee before the conference was cancelled, noted the decision to hold it "with satisfaction."

But Israel has long said there first must be a Mideast peace agreement before the establishment of a Mideast zone free of weapons of mass destruction. The region's Muslim nations argue that Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal presents the greatest threat to peace in the region. -- no it does not!! What is means is that you cannot gang up on israel and win a war via overwhelming Arab numbers...

The Israeli government had no immediate comment on Monday's General Assembly vote.

Last week, the General Assembly upgraded the Palestinians to that of a nonmember observer state, endorsing an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.

Just before Monday's vote, Iranian diplomat Khodadad Seifi told the assembly "the truth is that the Israeli regime is the only party which rejected to conditions for a conference." He called for "strong pressure on that regime to participate in the conference without any preconditions."

Israeli diplomat Isi Yanouka said his country has continuously pointed to the danger of nuclear proliferation in the Mideast, singling out Iran and Syria by name.

"All these cases challenge Israel's security and cast a dark shadow at the prospect of embarking on a meaningful regional security process," he said.

"The fact that the sponsors include in this anti-Israeli resolution language referring to the 2012 conference proves above all the ill-intent of the Arab states with regard to this conference," Yanouka said.

Syrian diplomat Abdullah Hallak told the assembly his government was angry that the conference wasn't going to take place because of "the whim of just one party, a party with nuclear warheads."

"We call on the international community to put pressure on Israel to accept the NPT, get rid of its arsenal and delivery systems, in order to allow for peace and stability in our region," he said.

The conference's main sponsors are the U.S., Russia and Britain. British Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt has said it is being postponed, not cancelled.

While the United States voted against the resolution, it voted in favor of two paragraphs in it that were put to separate votes. Both support universal adherence to the NPT, and call on those countries that aren't parties to ratify it "at the earliest date." The only "no" votes on those paragraphs were Israel and India.--- India that would be interesting.....I understand India and Israel are not exactly enemies...hmmmm
 
Last edited:

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Heh, Syria. Israel isn't part of the NPT.

I suggest that the UN get rid of dictatorships first.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
Ah yes Arabs, never out of hilarious excuses for their own failings. If they are only this creative in solving them...
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
174 to 6 is a rather strong message that Israelis can busily choose to ignore at their own peril.

But still, it not a matter of past records, and now a matter of what will happen in future. But to one extent, the tide has turned against Israel, simply because all world nations are looking at Israel and its rather crazy present behavior.

As I will await future developments.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
174 to 6 is a rather strong message that Israelis can busily choose to ignore at their own peril.

But still, it not a matter of past records, and now a matter of what will happen in future. But to one extent, the tide has turned against Israel, simply because all world nations are looking at Israel and its rather crazy present behavior.

As I will await future developments.

You have been waiting a long time haven't you? You have been making these same posts for years hoping your little wet dream will one day come true and the world will invade Israel.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,378
7,443
136
What peril? The UN invading anytime soon?

You have been waiting a long time haven't you? You have been making these same posts for years hoping your little wet dream will one day come true and the world will invade Israel.

Seriously guys, pull your heads out.

Economic sanctions would happen long before any "invasion". I firmly believe that's what he's referring to by UN action.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Seriously guys, pull your heads out.

Economic sanctions would happen long before any "invasion". I firmly believe that's what he's referring to by UN action.

That is about as likely as a military invasion.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
Personally, I disagree with nuclear non-proliferation treaties.

It's not that I want more nukes out there, but it seems disingenuous to say "no one should be allowed to make any more" when there are countries that already have huge stockpiles.

If you want to limit nuclear weapons fine, but the limit should be the same for every country, none of this "well you didn't make them early enough so you don't get any, but at the same time we're not getting rid of ours" garbage.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Seriously guys, pull your heads out.

Economic sanctions would happen long before any "invasion". I firmly believe that's what he's referring to by UN action.

LL was also predicting naval escorts for blockade runners.

Military is not off his wish list of actions by others against Israel.

He also seems to forget that at the present time, Israel has the ability to turn down the screws on the Palestinians if desired.

Economic sanctions will hurt the Palestinians more harsher than the Israelis.

Just like the sanctions in Gaza hurt the average person much more than HAms leadership.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
What peril? The UN invading anytime soon?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As other have pointed out, the UN and the international community is unlikely to use direct force and economic sanctions against Israel are far more likely to be used to solve mid-east peace issues.

As I can point our two other things.

(1) Could anyone in the world have predicted a decade ago or even five years ago that Israel would be overwhelming on the short side of those two recent UN resolutions? As Israel has lost all diplomatic advances its made in the past 64 years. As its very hard to say Israel is in better shape than it was even two years ago.

(2) The world may not care much about Israel or the Palestinians, but anything that threatens the flow of mid-east oil to world markets and everyone in the entire world gets very very concerned. And when present Israeli government actions is now the biggest threat to mid-east stability, world action taken against Israel looks more and more necessary now. As something that was unthinkable is now being considered today.
 

Broheim

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2011
4,592
2
81
to quote black president bush:

"UN, you get problem with that. You know what you should do. You should sanction me. Sanction me with your army. Oh! wait a minute! You don't have an army! So I guess that means you need to shut the fuck up! That's what would I do if I don't have an army, I would shut the fuck up. Shut. The. Fuck. UP!. That's right! Kofi Annan, I ain't takin' orders from an African. You might speak sixteen languages, but you gonna need them when you in Times Square selling fake hats.

Go sell some medicine, bitches!"
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As other have pointed out, the UN and the international community is unlikely to use direct force and economic sanctions against Israel are far more likely to be used to solve mid-east peace issues.

As I can point our two other things.

(1) Could anyone in the world have predicted a decade ago or even five years ago that Israel would be overwhelming on the short side of those two recent UN resolutions? As Israel has lost all diplomatic advances its made in the past 64 years. As its very hard to say Israel is in better shape than it was even two years ago.

(2) The world may not care much about Israel or the Palestinians, but anything that threatens the flow of mid-east oil to world markets and everyone in the entire world gets very very concerned. And when present Israeli government actions is now the biggest threat to mid-east stability, world action taken against Israel looks more and more necessary now. As something that was unthinkable is now being considered today.

Why do you continue to want to blame Israel for the actions that other countries do?
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As other have pointed out, the UN and the international community is unlikely to do a damn thing against Israel.

.

Fixed that for you.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Why do you continue to want to blame Israel for the actions that other countries do?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you EK, seem to think the past 64 years of Israeli government actions are somehow the actions of a moral and just nation? As your implied argument boils down to, if other nations do wrong, Israel is thus justified to be even more wrong. Which is bullshit EK, especially when all international eyes are now focused on Israel and Bozo Netanyuyu incredible stupidity.

As Israel is now losing and losing badly in the eyes of the international community.

You EK and your fellow Israeli fan clubbers are simply too biased to see it.

Of course you accuse me of the same bias, but I have been saying the Present Israeli Government actions are untenable. As you and your Pro-Israeli fan clubbers think I am proved wrong when the results are not instant. As I have maintained that international actions are anything but instantaneous.

As for me, I have always advocated a win win soft landing for Israel. But Earth to EK, Netanyuhu policies are now the greatest present danger to Israel.

Now EK, lets see which one of us in right in the END.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Dumb

Israel is not part of the treaty.

The resolution, approved Monday by a vote of 174-6 with 6 abstentions, calls on Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty "without further delay" and open its nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Treaties are voluntary, like contracts. Coercion is illegal, and what the UN is engaging in is coercion.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
-snip-
As other have pointed out, the UN and the international community is unlikely to use direct force and economic sanctions against Israel are far more likely to be used to solve mid-east peace issues.

Fuggin pipe dream.

No sanctions will ever amount to damn thing without the USA joining in, and that ain't gonna happen - ever.

Fern
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you EK, seem to think the past 64 years of Israeli government actions are somehow the actions of a moral and just nation? As your implied argument boils down to, if other nations do wrong, Israel is thus justified to be even more wrong. Which is bullshit EK, especially when all international eyes are now focused on Israel and Bozo Netanyuyu incredible stupidity.

As Israel is now losing and losing badly in the eyes of the international community.

You EK and your fellow Israeli fan clubbers are simply too biased to see it.

Of course you accuse me of the same bias, but I have been saying the Present Israeli Government actions are untenable. As you and your Pro-Israeli fan clubbers think I am proved wrong when the results are not instant. As I have maintained that international actions are anything but instantaneous.

As for me, I have always advocated a win win soft landing for Israel. But Earth to EK, Netanyuhu policies are now the greatest present danger to Israel.

Now EK, lets see which one of us in right in the END.

EK will be right on this one. At he very most there will be diplomatic disturbance but nothing more.

You haven't been correct about even ONE single prediction since you joined this forum and that is because you don't base your predictions on knowledge or information, you base them on your emotions.

Meanwhile, they are still slaughtering people by the thousands in Syria, Iran is executing people daily for no reason what so ever, SA are whipping women for disobeying their husbands, Egypt is launching a constitution that pretty much solidifies womens role as second class citizens, Pakistan are arresting and murdering people for blasphemy but HEY.....

They are not Jews so who cares...
 

ArchAngel777

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
5,223
61
91
EK will be right on this one. At he very most there will be diplomatic disturbance but nothing more.

You haven't been correct about even ONE single prediction since you joined this forum and that is because you don't base your predictions on knowledge or information, you base them on your emotions.

Meanwhile, they are still slaughtering people by the thousands in Syria, Iran is executing people daily for no reason what so ever, SA are whipping women for disobeying their husbands, Egypt is launching a constitution that pretty much solidifies womens role as second class citizens, Pakistan are arresting and murdering people for blasphemy but HEY.....

They are not Jews so who cares...

Well said.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
EK will be right on this one. At he very most there will be diplomatic disturbance but nothing more.

You haven't been correct about even ONE single prediction since you joined this forum and that is because you don't base your predictions on knowledge or information, you base them on your emotions.

Meanwhile, they are still slaughtering people by the thousands in Syria, Iran is executing people daily for no reason what so ever, SA are whipping women for disobeying their husbands, Egypt is launching a constitution that pretty much solidifies womens role as second class citizens, Pakistan are arresting and murdering people for blasphemy but HEY.....

They are not Jews so who cares...

Well he is good at ignoring the obvious. If Iran for whatever reason attacks shipping he'll blame Israel. Israel can't coerce such action. That is the sole responsibility of those who do the act. Note how hes done it yet again.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As other have pointed out, the UN and the international community is unlikely to use direct force and economic sanctions against Israel are far more likely to be used to solve mid-east peace issues.

As I can point our two other things.

(1) Could anyone in the world have predicted a decade ago or even five years ago that Israel would be overwhelming on the short side of those two recent UN resolutions? As Israel has lost all diplomatic advances its made in the past 64 years. As its very hard to say Israel is in better shape than it was even two years ago.

(2) The world may not care much about Israel or the Palestinians, but anything that threatens the flow of mid-east oil to world markets and everyone in the entire world gets very very concerned. And when present Israeli government actions is now the biggest threat to mid-east stability, world action taken against Israel looks more and more necessary now. As something that was unthinkable is now being considered today.

(1) Yeah but don't they have a lot of new land their people are settling on to show for it? What did the "diplomatic advances" do for Israel or its people?

(2) Wait, which ME country gives a shit enough about the Pals to interrupt the flow of oil in which said country profits very heavily from and frankly depends on that profit to run their country? Or are you saying the Pals are going to interrupt the flow of oil somehow? Or maybe Israel is going to try to drop a smart bomb on some Hamas guy and miss and hit some huge pipeline or something?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
Fuggin pipe dream.

No sanctions will ever amount to damn thing without the USA joining in, and that ain't gonna happen - ever.

Fern

And this.

Can they even pass any serious sanctions that the US can't veto?
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you EK, seem to think the past 64 years of Israeli government actions are somehow the actions of a moral and just nation? As your implied argument boils down to, if other nations do wrong, Israel is thus justified to be even more wrong. Which is bullshit EK, especially when all international eyes are now focused on Israel and Bozo Netanyuyu incredible stupidity.

As Israel is now losing and losing badly in the eyes of the international community.

You EK and your fellow Israeli fan clubbers are simply too biased to see it.

Of course you accuse me of the same bias, but I have been saying the Present Israeli Government actions are untenable. As you and your Pro-Israeli fan clubbers think I am proved wrong when the results are not instant. As I have maintained that international actions are anything but instantaneous.

As for me, I have always advocated a win win soft landing for Israel. But Earth to EK, Netanyuhu policies are now the greatest present danger to Israel.

Now EK, lets see which one of us in right in the END.

The international community means nothing...they are all puppets of whatever cause benefits them....