Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Blix challenges Bush's Commitment to NPT

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 3:28 am    Post subject: Blix challenges Bush's Commitment to NPT Reply with quote

Blix has leveled criticisms against Bush for his commitment to NPT.

Yahoo News

Quote:
UNITED NATIONS - Washington isn't taking "the common bargain" of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as seriously as it once did, and that's dimming global support for the U.S. campaign to shut down the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector said.

Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton, by questioning the value of treaties and international law, has also damaged the U.S. position, Hans Blix said.

"There is a feeling the common edifice of the international community is being dismantled," the Swedish arms expert said.

Blix, now chairman of the Swedish government-sponsored Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission, spoke with reporters in the second week of a monthlong conference to review the 1970 nonproliferation treaty.

Under the 188-nation pact, nations without nuclear weapons pledge not to pursue them, in exchange for a commitment by five nuclear-weapons states — the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China — to negotiate toward nuclear disarmament.

The review conference has been stalled, without an agenda, because of a dispute over agenda language dealing with the very dissatisfaction Blix spoke of: the complaints by some that the nuclear-weapons states are moving too slowly toward disarmament.

A last-minute objection by Egypt last Friday scuttled an apparent agreement on the agenda. The Egyptians wanted language that focused more on assessing how well the nuclear powers have done in taking specific steps toward disarmament, under commitments they made in 2000 at the last of these twice-a-decade conferences.

Nuclear "have-nots" complain that the Bush administration, in particular, has acted contrary to those commitments, by rejecting the nuclear test-ban treaty, for example.

Washington, for its part, wants the conference to focus on what it alleges are Iran's plans to build nuclear arms in violation of the treaty, and on North Korea's withdrawal from the treaty and claim to have nuclear bombs.

Blix told reporters there is "a great deal of concern" about North Korea and Iran among states without nuclear weapons.

But "that feeling of concern is somewhat muted by the feeling that the United States in particular, and perhaps some other nuclear weapons states, are not taking the common bargain as seriously as they had committed themselves to do in the past," he said.

He cited Bush administration proposals to build new nuclear weapons and talk in Washington even of testing weapons, ending a 13-year-old U.S. moratorium on nuclear tests. He also referred to statements by Bolton, President Bush's embattled nominee to be U.N. ambassador, devaluing treaties and the authority of international law.

"Why are you complaining about (North Korea) breaching the treaty if treaties are not binding?" Blix, an international lawyer, asked rhetorically.

In 2002-03, Blix led U.N. teams that found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 700 inspections, undermining Bush administration claims that such weapons existed. Despite these findings, Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, and U.S. inspectors have since similarly found no such weapons programs.

At the treaty conference Monday, private consultations appeared to make progress toward agreement on an agenda, without which the sessions might be unable to address such pressing issues as North Korea and Iran.

The conference president, Sergio de Queiroz Duarte, met with key parties over the weekend to try to bridge the diplomatic gap. On Monday, without confirming that agreement was in hand, the Brazilian diplomat said, "It seems we are continuing the consultations in a favorable mood." He said he hoped an agenda could be adopted as early as Tuesday.


Seems to me that Blix has a point. How can Bush develop bunker buster bombs and consult about weapons testing, essentially breaking provisions of the NPT, and hope for these other regimes to do the same? Let's also not forget Washington's tacit acceptance of Israel's nuclear arsenal.

On the other hand, anyone else find the references to John Bolton a bit too timely? It may be that Blix is finding a clever way to lobby against his appointment as ambassador to the U.N. by focusing criticism on him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton, by questioning the value of treaties and international law, has also damaged the U.S. position, Hans Blix said.



I doubt the timing of this is accidental. It is also a good thing to bring up. May 12 was when the confirmation hearings are supposed to start again.

I was sure wrong when I predicted the nomination would be withdrawn by May 1. I need to remind myself that Bush & Co. don't play by the usual rules.

There is some humor in this, though. Don't sign the Kyoto Agreement and abrogate the Nuclear Test Ban treaty but seek international support to oppose N Korea leaving the NPT. Maybe Joo can explain the logic of this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gwangjuboy



Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blix is an attention starved leach. He loved the limelight in the build up to the Iraq war, and he obviously misses it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hypnotist



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gwangjuboy wrote:
Blix is an attention starved leach. He loved the limelight in the build up to the Iraq war, and he obviously misses it.


That doesn't make him wrong.

I loved his cameo in Team America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Quote:
Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton, by questioning the value of treaties and international law, has also damaged the U.S. position, Hans Blix said.



I doubt the timing of this is accidental. It is also a good thing to bring up. May 12 was when the confirmation hearings are supposed to start again.

I was sure wrong when I predicted the nomination would be withdrawn by May 1. I need to remind myself that Bush & Co. don't play by the usual rules.

There is some humor in this, though. Don't sign the Kyoto Agreement and abrogate the Nuclear Test Ban treaty but seek international support to oppose N Korea leaving the NPT. Maybe Joo can explain the logic of this.


I support Kyoto but it has nothing to do with the NPT. It is an environmental treaty, that China and India by the way won't go along with.

The US isn't testing nuclear weapons but even if it did it would not be the same as N Korea having nuclear weapons.

There is a differece between your average Bob having nuclear weapons and a serial killer having them.

North Korea's government is illegitimate, and it has no right to exist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
canuckistan
Mod Team
Mod Team


Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Quote:
Don't sign the Kyoto Agreement and abrogate the Nuclear Test Ban treaty but seek international support to oppose N Korea leaving the NPT.


Do as we say, not as we do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hypnotist



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 2:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
The US isn't testing nuclear weapons but even if it did it would not be the same as N Korea having nuclear weapons.

There is a differece between your average Bob having nuclear weapons and a serial killer having them.


How do you decide which is which? For that matter, which is more likely to actually use nukes? Point of reference: Only one of the two countries makes a habit of sending its troops abroad, and only one of the two countries has ever actually used nukes.

For many people in this world, North Korea having a handful of nukes is not a lot more scary than the US having tens of thousands of them.

Quote:
North Korea's government is illegitimate, and it has no right to exist.


You don't hear many North Koreans saying that. Until they are saying it, who is to say that the government is illegitimate? I can think of many other words to describe it, but that doesn't seem to be one of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
How do you decide which is which? For that matter, which is more likely to actually use nukes? Point of reference: Only one of the two countries makes a habit of sending its troops abroad, and only one of the two countries has ever actually used nukes.


N Korea has sent troops abroad . and the US of nuclear weapons in WWII was needed otherwise the US would have had to invaded japan .

Besides sending troops abroad and what the US did in WW II isn't relative to what the question is. What North Korea is is .



Quote:
For many people in this world, North Korea having a handful of nukes is not a lot more scary than the US having tens of thousands of them.


and the reason for that is what.

the only nations that the us is in conflict with are ruled by expansionist thugs most of whom don't let their own citizens leave.

Quote:

You don't hear many North Koreans saying that. Until they are saying it, who is to say that the government is illegitimate? I can think of many other words to describe it, but that doesn't seem to be one of them.



i don't think many cambodians said that about pol pot. govts that rule by cult of personality and kill those that run away and starve their own people are illigitimate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 4:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You don't hear many North Koreans saying that. Until they are saying it, who is to say that the government is illegitimate? I can think of many other words to describe it, but that doesn't seem to be one of them.


I do agree with Joo that the Nork government is illegitimate. For me, governments are only legitimate if they have the freely given consent of the people. I do not believe this has ever happened in the North.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 7:58 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

Quote:
the only nations that the us is in conflict with are ruled by expansionist thugs most of whom don't let their own citizens leave.


In other threads, you portray Europe as in conflict with the US.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hypnotist



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Quote:
You don't hear many North Koreans saying that. Until they are saying it, who is to say that the government is illegitimate? I can think of many other words to describe it, but that doesn't seem to be one of them.


I do agree with Joo that the Nork government is illegitimate. For me, governments are only legitimate if they have the freely given consent of the people. I do not believe this has ever happened in the North.


There are very very few countries with a free and fair press where the government has gained the popular support of over half the electorate (not the voting electorate). At what point does that become illegitimate?

And given how indoctrinated the Norks are, what makes you think they'd vote for anything other than Ol' Kim if they were to suddenly find themselves in front of a ballot box?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
hypnotist



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

N Korea has sent troops abroad . and the US of nuclear weapons in WWII was needed otherwise the US would have had to invaded japan .


It has? Where? When?

We can debate the need to nuke Japan until the cows come home. It doesn't change the fact that the US is the only country, ever, to have used a nuclear weapon in war. Can't you see how that might possibly unsettle some countries without the best of relations with the US?

Quote:
Quote:
For many people in this world, North Korea having a handful of nukes is not a lot more scary than the US having tens of thousands of them.


and the reason for that is what.


The US is widely mistrusted in the world, and for very good reasons. Look at the interventions in Latin America for some examples as to why.

Quote:
the only nations that the us is in conflict with are ruled by expansionist thugs most of whom don't let their own citizens leave.


Utter rubbish, Joo. Again, look at Latin America - and I don't just mean Cuba.

Quote:
Quote:

You don't hear many North Koreans saying that. Until they are saying it, who is to say that the government is illegitimate? I can think of many other words to describe it, but that doesn't seem to be one of them.


i don't think many cambodians said that about pol pot. govts that rule by cult of personality and kill those that run away and starve their own people are illigitimate.


Remind me, wasn't the US implicated in providing military aid to the Khmer Rouge around '79 - well after the killing fields?

I won't argue that those actions aren't reprehensible. Mass starvation is coming very close to genocide in my book. All the same, I think the case for regime change needs to be very strong indeed and fully supported by the international community to be moral. As, indeed, it needs to be to be legal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

It has? Where? When?


to the mid east in the 80's

Quote:
We can debate the need to nuke Japan until the cows come home. It doesn't change the fact that the US is the only country, ever, to have used a nuclear weapon in war. Can't you see how that might possibly unsettle some countries without the best of relations with the US?
[quote]

Yes but only a little




Quote:
The US is widely mistrusted in the world, and for very good reasons. Look at the interventions in Latin America for some examples as to why.


Ok that is still not reason to feel that way.



Quote:
Utter rubbish, Joo. Again, look at Latin America - and I don't just mean Cuba.


Over the last 30 years



Quote:
Remind me, wasn't the US implicated in providing military aid to the Khmer Rouge around '79 - well after the killing fields?


the US never helped the Kymer Rouge come to power , nor did it support them when the killing feilds were going on. Indeed Vietnam helped the Khmer Rouge during the vietnam war.

The US supported a group in exile that included the Kymer Rouge after they were overthrown but the US never supported them directly .





Quote:
I won't argue that those actions aren't reprehensible. Mass starvation is coming very close to genocide in my book. All the same, I think the case for regime change needs to be very strong indeed and fully supported by the international community to be moral. As, indeed, it needs to be to be legal.


The case for regime change in North Korea is clear. What I worry about is that any deal w/ NK will just allow NK to continue to persecute its own people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 9:08 am    Post subject: Re: ... Reply with quote

Nowhere Man wrote:
Quote:
the only nations that the us is in conflict with are ruled by expansionist thugs most of whom don't let their own citizens leave.


In other threads, you portray Europe as in conflict with the US.


I should have said military conflict. Europe is a rival not an enemy. The only thing that should Europe should be bombed with is rotten vegetables tossed at their leaders.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International