[Rain-maker]

Next step is a pre-emptive nuke?

[Rain-maker]

UN to issue alert over spread of nuclear arms

By Mark Turner at the United Nations
Published: November 30 2004 00:03

The world system to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons is being rapidly eroded, threatening a “cascade of proliferation,” a high-level panel on UN reform will say this week.

The report, due to be released on Thursday, will recommend the UN Security Council slow the spread of weapons using an explicit pledge of “collective action” against any state or group that launches a nuclear attack or even threatens such an attack on a non-nuclear-weapon state.

Kofi Annan, UN secretarygeneral, last year established a panel of 16 veteran politicians and diplomats from around the world to identify the main threats facing mankind. It identifies nuclear proliferation as a particular danger and it warns: “The nuclear proliferation regime is at risk because of lack of compliance with existing commitments, a changing international security environment, and radical advances in technology.

“We are approaching a point at which the erosion of the nuclear regime could become irreversible, and result in a cascade of proliferation.” In 1963, only four states had nuclear arsenals. Today eight states are known to have one, and several others are suspected of developing them. Close to 60 states operate or are building nuclear power or research reactors, and at least 30 possess the infrastructure to build nuclear weapons at relatively short notice. Terrorists are also believed to be seeking them.

To help prevent secret weapons programmes, the panel will also urge all countries to stop building enrichment or reprocessing facilities, until a global scheme is designed to enable the International Atomic Energy Agency to guarantee the supply of fissile material to genuine “civil nuclear users”.

The panel examined a wide range of threats, including terrorism, disease, poverty and environmental degradation. But the risk of nuclear Armageddon may be the most pressing of all, and has led to growing disagreement over how to tackle nuclear advances in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America.

It argues that nuclear weapons states “must honour their commitments to move towards disarmament”, and reaffirm promises not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. The Security Council pledge for “collective action” could help ease non-nuclear states' concerns.

All de facto nuclear states, including Israel, Pakistan and India (which are not named), should “pledge a commitment to non-proliferation and disarmament”, ratify the comprehensive test-ban treaty and support talks on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. In order to reduce supply, the panel says the IAEA's additional protocol should become the standard, and urges a new system whereby peaceful nuclear technology users could be guaranteed fissile material although the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes “must be preserved.”

In a possible bow to Washington, it also calls on “all states” to join the US-led Proliferation Security Initiative, with UN Security Council backing.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/2ecedea6-4260-11d9-8e3c-00000e2511c8,ft_acl=,s01=1.html

[LibertarianInExile]

F the UN. The US makes its own decisions about its security. Screw those chateaubriand-eating US-taxpayer-funded do-nothing weasels.

[TalBlack]

All of this "intervening" that the UN claims it can do; Has it EVER been held RESPONSABLE for the outcome? Or for FAILING to intervene?

And that is the only argument necessary to dismiss the UN: it has no responsibility or culpability.

[ken5050]

Actually, this report justifies, IMHO, a pre-emptive strike on the UN..

[Aussie Dasher]

How about a pre-emptive strike on the UN?

[killjoy]

The report says that force is legitimate if an endangered state, backed by the Security Council, decides that a threat is serious and imminent;

Keep in mind that Bush said we attacked Iraq before they became an imminent threat (contrary to what the news/Michael Moore reports).

[philetus]

Is Kofi trying to get the focus off himself?

[FreedomCalls]

Pre-emptive Strikes Justified: UN Report

Does this vindicate Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto's strike on Pearl Harbor?

[TChris]

So, the principle of preemptive self-defence is a correct and ethical one, but only if promulgated by an organization (UN Security Council) other than the one defending itself? The logical conclusion: Only the UN Security Council is capable of acting ethically. The very same principle, in the very same circumstances, promulgated by a sovereign nation becomes unethical.

What a load of elitist, narcissistic, bovine excrement.

The UN: Hey, we may be corrupt and incompetent, but at least we want to take over the world!

[Ptarmigan]

I did not the UN is saying it now. I wonder if this means we can do a pre-emptive strike on the UN and other leftist/Communist groups?

[AndrewC]

They can kiss our posteriors. The last invasion of Iraq was the enforcement of the 1991 ceasefire of which Iraq was blatantly noncompliant.

Iraq: Weapons Threat, Compliance, Sanctions, and U.S. Policy

The Senate and House passed a resolution, S.J.Res. 54 (P.L. 105-235, signed August 14, 1998), declaring Iraq in “material breach” of the ceasefire.

[-=Wing_0_Walker=-]

... and just who is supposed to do the preemptive striking for the UN?

[spodefly]

Unilateralist Cowboy BTTT

[Wolfhound777]

The report says that force is legitimate if an endangered state, backed by the Security Council, decides that a threat is serious and imminent; every nonmilitary option has been explored; the state has assessed the means, duration and scale of the strike needed to meet the threat and has no hidden agenda; and the military moves would not create consequences that are worse than the threatened action.The charter now permits the use of force in self-defence if an attack occurs, or if authorized by the Security Council in the event of a threat to world peace.

Translation: Pre-emptive strikes are authorized as long as we (the UN) way so. This is still BS and the UN needs to stick to humanitarian aid and that's it.

[SunkenCiv]

Oh, sure, now it comes out, now that factions in the UN have failed in their bid to influence the outcome of the US election.

[SunkenCiv]

Annan 'very Disappointed' His Son Received
Payments From Firm With an Oil-for-Food Contract
TBO.com ^ | 30 November 2004 | Aussie Dasher
Posted on 11/29/2004 7:26:35 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1290791/posts

[Mr. K]

It is wither that or wait until AFTER they bomb you...


silly idea if you KNOW they are and the TELL YOU they are going to...