Israel must get rid of its nuclear weapons, UNGA majority decides

a reply to: Deplorable

If the Nork's go full Nuclear (there is already an option for this as they HAVE gone Nuclear albeit not yet massively so) it will be the only option open to give North Korea something to think about, of course there is really no need to base them in south Korea, but it is a show or strength that small minded petty dictators will find uncomfortable like walking on eggshells, so I understand the reasoning there, re-introduce the idea of MAD to those petty lunatics.

Another reason is that if Russia is as has been suggested going to have Nork Soldiers fighting in the Ukraine, then Lil Kim probably wants them to station Nukes in his country as well and since Russia has fell out with the west, they are likely to no longer hold to non-proliferation treatise, so we are back to cold albeit HOT cold war politics.

Russia is now weaker and behind where it once was technically speaking but that actually makes it more volatile and dangerous than if there are parity.

Both parties are responsible for the current situation however BUT North Korea is a loose cannon that Russia should be careful of as well.

a reply to: ussmidway
Really? Sure you can source that....

The United States remains the largest donor to the United Nations. In 2020, it contributed more than $11 billion, which accounted for just under one-fifth of funding for the body’s collective budget. That was despite President Donald Trump’s efforts to cut funding as his administration prioritized sovereignty over globalism. His administration argued that the United States incurred disproportionately large costs and that UN programs contradicted the administration’s policy stances. President Joe Biden has affirmed the United Nations’ importance to U.S. foreign policy and increased funding to the organization.

[www.cfr.org...]

You don't bite the hand that feeds you, so what is this distraction for? Maybe to justify giving the UN a raise? They want a cut of the Ukranian money?

The UN is, first and foremost - in composition and operation - a club of elites.

Their club provides legitimacy (they would never hurt anybody, right?) to elites for their plans and actions.

Whenever the big club, sorry the UN, makes some "pronouncement," it is because someone asked them to.

Now, who's "request" do you think they're honoring?


... No seriously, who do you think asked for this declaration?

The annual resolution submitted by Egypt to the UNGA in New York was sponsored by the Palestinian Authority and 19 counties including Bahrain, Jordan, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates.

Now how do you think these nations "parlayed" this request into the force of consensus?

... NO, seriously?

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Well, one way to denuclearize, is to get rid of the nukes.

I'm trying to think of the others...



Also, the only reason a country would give up its primary defense, is if they have something more powerful, or effective...

a reply to: TrueAmerican

While I don't think they should get rid of them they should acknowledge they have them and be held to the same standards and oversights the rest of the nuclear nations exist under.

a reply to: TrueAmerican
100%, Israel will never give them up. Just common sense. If you lived in a country that was surrounded by other countries that hate you, what would you do? Those other countries usually fight amongst themselves, imagine what they would do to a country that they detest, and has just been declawed.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: TrueAmerican

While I don't think they should get rid of them they should acknowledge they have them and be held to the same standards and oversights the rest of the nuclear nations exist under.

why? they didn't sign any nuclear treaties so they aren't bound to anything. and before you say it, north korea and iran did sign onto such agreements so our opposition to them possessing nuclear weapons isn't hypocrisy.

a reply to: TrueAmerican


Israel should tell them to go pound sand.


In today's geopolitical environment it's suicide to give up any deterrents.


But if the Mossad are the best at what they do (they are) , surely they know exactly who is behind this forced descent into total breakdown of societies?

Yes?

No?

If there's one government that can send out a specialized group of professionals to quickly take care of the situation, it's them.


Why don't they do it?

a reply to: TrueAmerican


That's easy, even for an atheist.


God helps those who help themselves.


Nuclear weapons are effective not because you use them, but because you have them.


Bullies pick on easy targets and as long as Israel has nukes she's not one of those.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

If God loves Israel so much, why do they need nuclear weapons?

Now while at the core I agree with nobody should have them, in answer to the quoted question God gave weapons to his arch angels when they fought the legions of lucifer, so why not his "chosen" people.

a reply to: namehere

Why...because oversight of such a world ending tech is good for everyone. That's why...

I want to know why you think they should be exempt from oversight by the rest of the world just like every other nuclear country is?

Wow, people are talking like they KNOW Israel has nukes. How about BEFORE we go there, you PROVE they do? Which is why this is so ridiculous of the UN in the first place!

By that reasoning, we should have already obliterated Iran based on hearsay. And the funny thing is, Israel probably already would have IF they could prove Iran had nukes, and IF Israel has them.

Funny thing is, we DID obliterate Iraq based on hearsay and suspicion of WMD's. Israel just wants to be left the F alone. Cause if they aren't, the world may find out once and for all that they DO have nukes- the hard way.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

You'd have to be ignorant to think they don't. You speak with a lot of bias in this subject which makes you heard to take seriously.

originally posted by: TrueAmerican

Israel must dispose of all its nuclear weapons and place its nuclear sites under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s purview, the United Nations General Assembly’s First Committee stated in an initial 152-5 vote.

The five nations that opposed Friday’s resolution on the “risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East” were: Canada, Israel, Micronesia, Palau and the United States. Another 24 countries abstained, including European Union members.

The five nations that opposed Friday’s resolution on the “risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East” were: Canada, Israel, Micronesia, Palau and the United States. Another 24 countries abstained, including European Union members.

Israel must get rid of its nuclear weapons, UNGA majority decides

Wait. So the UNGA is going to vote on a resolution about Israel giving up its nuclear weapons, when no one has ever proved that Israel EVEN HAS THEM.

And you wonder why people say the UN is a joke?

It was proven a few decades back by the Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu who leaked photos of the project to UK newspaper The Guardian in 86 and spent 18 years in solitary for blowing the whistle on the illegal program.

Israel stopped trying to deny the program a long time ago, all the US and European companies that were engaged in the illegal nuclear program are public info. Though Israel does have more of a reason than other countries to have nukes do to the threat of its neighbours.

Why won't Israel give up it's nukes? Because they remember WW2.

a reply to: stelth2

not only that, but they fought to the last man, woman, and child in the 7 days war, after declaring independence. They fought 7 armies at the same time, and beat them. It came at a high cost, but this is the reason why they will never give them up. They don't trust their neighbors, they don't trust global elites (WW2 and Germany), and they are absolutely resolute in being a jewish nation after WW2, 7 day war, where the palestinians left and abandoned them, while they fought to the death, or turned around and joined the arabs in killing them which is all the more reason why they keep pushing the palestinians out. As far as nukes, they have them in their back pocket to ensure no arab nation ever tries and destroy them, and if they try, they will make darn sure they will feel alot of pain.

Camain

a reply to: RickyD

They signed nothing; hence they have no obligation to comply with anything. I'm perfectly fine with that myself. UN oversight has done so well in the past, you know.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Israel for sure has been proven to have Nukes

ever hear of Mr. Vanunu



here he is being kidnapped by Mossed (honey trapped waiting for his US contact), read his hand.




and now for the juicy bits a real nuclear assembly



and another unassembled core(primary)




All these pictures were taken at his work station at Demona Nuclear site.

the US know and the French know and the South Africans knew as they helped them set off what was know as the


Vela Incident
here is an article where they parties involved admitted testing something nuclear near the horn of Africa and Antarctica

The Vela satellites were designed to pick up nuclear tests and explosions and some would have you believe this incident was caused by a micro meteorite but out of all the sats and all the time it only happened once and the sat continued to work just fine for getting hit with something moving Mach 20.

and this is just the tip of the spear so to speak, Israel has the Sampson option where if they know Israel is going to be over run they are just going to nuke the whole area.

how are they going to do that with out nukes?

we should thank the French for Israel having nukes, back in the day they were selling reactors that could be dual use(military and civilian) for the likes of North Korea, South Africa, Israel and likely Pakistan.

Not a great list of consumers.


Israel its self says it maintains what it calls 'nuclear ambiguity' we know they have them just not how many or what kind, we know they are the leaders in neutron bombs and even helped the US out on out ABM systems that used a similar warhead.

Japan is what they call a turn key nuclear state they could have everything built but in parts that just need to be assembled but if they keep the cores out they are by definition a non nuclear state. ANY NATO country with certain types of reactors likely have a few nukes tucked away.

Saudi Arabia tried to buy them from i THINK Pakistan or India or Israel i forget. but they were offering lage sums of cash for a completed warhead or 3.

a reply to: moonrocks88

lastly we have survalance assets that have VERY good sensors on them to pick nuclear cores up even inside a silo or mountain, they give off enough heat when you touch a air dropped bombs casing (the outside) they are warm.

they also release a good amount of helium over their life time, that helium is normal helium and Tritium and Deuterium and if you have a stop pile of nukes you will have to store that some how and if all of a sudden you are storing tritum and duterium it is a HUGE sign you are making or storing nukes.

the core of nukes have a life time, they need to be recrafted every few decades from the decay of the materials inside like polonium and the plutonium, they started mixing gallium inside the plutonium to give them a few more years.

nukes REQUIRE pretty regular maintenance, let alone their delivery systems. So once you have them you have them for life time starship.

that means certain times certain US satellites and spy aircraft would pick up this work and HAVE picked it up.

In the Demona reactor the US and the IAEA found a whole second floor hidden below the 'real' control room with dial hooked to a computer to make it appear like they were not manufacturing and enriching Pu and U.


about 10 years ago we found out they were testing new high speed detonators that are only useful for starting a nuclear chain reaction.