The UN Is Walking A Dangerous Rope

[Annie]

When it comes to Israel, it's like the US and UN are in a cold war. Problem is, they aren't 'balanced' the way the powers need to be.

There may well come a time where the US feels it has no choice but to say they will do what it takes to protect Dodge, even if the citizens say they don't want the protection. An adult has to do what an adult has to do.

Regarding the bizarro UN bringing up the taking out of a nearly completed reactor, that's their 'all so subtle way', of attempting to warn Israel off of Iran. Won't work, see above paragraph.

 

[nbdysfu]

Up, but here's the other one for Bam.

http://www.guerrillanews.com/intelligence/doc944.html
qoute:
______
"Instead our task is to encourage North Korea to go the peaceful route taken by its neighbors, South Korea and Japan. Japan, the sufferer from the only use of nuclear weapons in warfare, has especial credibility.The USA, the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, and by calling North Korea part of an axis of evil almost invites them to make bombs, must tread warily. But the issue is so serious that the UN must leave no doubt that the world will not tolerate further proliferation. I suggest that urging an open society is a better alternative than saying that we, the strongest nation, have a right to make a preemptive strike against any nation a technically uninformed leader might choose for economic or other reasons. "
______

 

[Annie]

I took a look. I think I'll just stick with my libertarian, Jacksonian, Hobbesian view ot the world.

 

[nbdysfu]

The Federation of American Scientists site also has a lot on the conflict:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/osiraq.htm
qoute:
______
"Iraq began to expand its nuclear sector in the 1970's, but made little progress in the early 1980's, when most of its energy and attention were focused on the war against Iran. In September 1980, at the onset of the Iran-Iraq War, the Israeli Chief of Army Intelligence urged the Iranians to bomb Osiraq. On 30 September 1980 a a pair of Iranian Phantom jets, part of a larger group of aircraft attacking a conventional electric power plant near Baghdad, also bombed the Osiraq reactor. Minor damage to the reactor was reported. No further Iranian air attacks against Iraqi nuclear facilities were identified during the rest of the seven-year war"
______
and
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/docs/41rea.html
qoute:
______
"In the last years of the Iran-Iraq War, well after the June 1981 destruction of the Osirak reactor by the Israelis, Saddam Hussein attempted and eventually succeeded in his own PCP strikes against the Iranian nuclear reactor at Bushehr.

Iraqi warplanes first struck the Bushehr reactor on March 24, 1984, inflicting light damage. Two more Iraqi air strikes took place in 1985, one in 1986, two in 1987, and a final raid occured in 198855. These seven raids destroyed most of the known Iranian capability to produce special nuclear materials. No ballistic missiles landed on nuclear sites, although this was the first war in history where both sides exchanged ballistic missile attacks.

Apparently, Iraq was no more eager to face an Iranian atomic bomb than Israel had been to confront Iraqi nuclear weapons. "

 

[Annie]

Apparently, Iraq was no more eager to face an Iranian atomic bomb than Israel had been to confront Iraqi nuclear weapons. "

On one thing we can all agree, I think: That is one nasty neighborhood all the way around. I for one am very, very glad I'm here and not there.

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by Kathianne
No one was trying to 'muscle' the IAEA out of Libya. The US and UK want their own inspectors there also. It was the UK that Libya first approached to begin the talks with the US.

For some reason the US/UK is not entirely comfortable with the reliability or honesty of the UN:

http://rogerlsimon.com/archives/00000578.htm

I am little lost at the BLOG from the fiction writer Simon. Is the insinuation that the UN is pilfering "oil for food" funds into personal gain for its members? You will need more than a BLOG entry from a fiction writer to prove this. Especially one who admits to using drugs.

Once again, I find it amusing that it is the US/UK who aren't comfortable with the UN when it was the US/UK that stood behind a fraudulent document linking Saddam to yellow cake purchases in Niger to prop up support for an invasion the UN wouldn't support. This is a fact, not a op-ed BLOG.

The UN is only useful to the US when they are in agreement with them. When they aren't, they are discredited as a joke. At this point, I think the US should just pull out of the UN and end the charade. I am sure most of you would welcome that.

-Bam

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by nbdysfu
Nor this guy, apparently:

"I think the UN is bizarro world," said Israeli deputy ambassador Arye Mekel after the session. for consideration in the UN General Assembly's 2004 agenda: The Israeli bombing of Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor.


Nor the IDF apparently, mind the 'zionist source' : ].here The IDF homesite has some info on it too that I haven't seen anywhere in the media, like terrorists launching about twenty shoulder fired rockets at IDF.

Oh God, another BLOG entry. Are you suprised that an Israeli would not approve of the UN? Maybe these FACTS can explain it:

UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992


Resolution 106: "... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"
Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"
Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"
Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"
Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"
Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"
Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"
Resolution 248: "... 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"
Resolution 250: "... 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"
Resolution 251: "... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"
Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"
Resolution 256: "... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation""
Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"
Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"
Resolution 265: "... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"
Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"
Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"
Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"
Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"
Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"
Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon'
Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"
Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"
Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"
Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"
Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"
Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"
Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians"
Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'"
Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'"
Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"
Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"
Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"
Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"
Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"
Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"
Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"
Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"
Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"
Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"
Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"
Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.

If these resolutions are so "bizaro", why did Bush and Powell push so hard to get one against Iraq?

As I stated earlier, the UN is only a useful tool for the US when they are in line with the US agenda. It is so obvious it is hilarious.

-Bam

 

[jimnyc]

The UN 'is' basically a joke and has been for quite some time now. I wouldn't trust them to arbitrate an employment issue, much less issues that affect the entire world. Some seem to think the world needs the UN's blessing on everything before matters are accepted as valid. I'm glad the US thumbed their noses at them and I hope they continue to do so.

 

[jimnyc]

If these resolutions are so "bizaro", why did Bush and Powell push so hard to get one against Iraq?

To feed the wackos out there who need 'vaildation'. It's called politics. It's the same reason the government works with treehuggers on resolutions instead of just shooting the nitwits.

As I stated earlier, the UN is only a useful tool for the US when they are in line with the US agenda. It is so obvious it is hilarious.

I agree, the UN is hilarious.

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by nbdysfu
Up, but here's the other one for Bam.

http://www.guerrillanews.com/intelligence/doc944.html
qoute:
______
"Instead our task is to encourage North Korea to go the peaceful route taken by its neighbors, South Korea and Japan. Japan, the sufferer from the only use of nuclear weapons in warfare, has especial credibility.The USA, the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, and by calling North Korea part of an axis of evil almost invites them to make bombs, must tread warily. But the issue is so serious that the UN must leave no doubt that the world will not tolerate further proliferation. I suggest that urging an open society is a better alternative than saying that we, the strongest nation, have a right to make a preemptive strike against any nation a technically uninformed leader might choose for economic or other reasons. "
______

"Nicholas Kristof in an op-ed article in The New York Times on November 15th 2002 stated, without proof, or even argument, that if Israel had not bombed the OSIRAK reactor in 1981 Iraq would have gained nuclear weapons in the 1980s.

There is a lot of evidence against this statement. French nuclear reactor engineer, the late Yves Girard, was aware of the carelessness of the Canadians in supplying a heavy water reactor to India, and the French in selling the DIMONA reactor to Israel without insisting on any international safeguards to prevent military use. In 1975 Girard refused to help to supply a heavy water moderated reactor to Iraq. Instead the reactor, OSIRAK, was moderated by light water, and therefore deliberately unsuited to making plutonium for bombs. IAEA safeguards promised regular inspections and French technicians were to be present for 5 or 10 years following initial operation but they left immediately after the bombing. It would not have been possible for them to make an undetected conversion or to misuse the fuel supplied."


Interesting info from the link you supplied. Makes the UN look a little less "bizaro", don't you think?


-Bam

 

[DKSuddeth]

It's the same reason the government works with treehuggers on resolutions instead of just shooting the nitwits.

define treehugger, please.

 

[nbdysfu]

originally posted by Bam
Interesting info from the link you supplied. Makes the UN look a little less "bizaro", don't you think?
__________________

It's very interesting, considering the IAEA report in the Richard Wilson came previous to our discovery in the end of the gulf war that Saddam had a nuclear weapons program after all. That Kritof article you refer to makes a justification of the Osirak installation based on that. A synopsis of it is located on the NYTimes archive site, if you don't believe me.

Further Bizarro is that all these nations India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, all believed that each was building arms programs with the intent of invading each other, and they almost totally carried out preemptive strikes on each other. Fifteen years later it turns out that india and pakistan have tested nuke weapons, nk has declared them, libya is trying to sell off its research facilities like a drunken Taylor supporter, and Iraq would have had them to use in its invasion of Kuwait and most likely Iran. The thirty odd scuds he fired at Israel in that conflict would have at the least been dirty bombs. Bizarro.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
define treehugger, please.

I mean that in the literal sense (although I know a few liberals lost in the outfield that a stray bullet may take care of).

 

[MtnBiker]

does this help

 

[eric]

Never heard of a treehugger ?

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
define treehugger, please.

It's the opposite of a terbacky spittin', gun totin', pickup drivin', GED earning, cross burnin', guy with a bumper sticker on the back of his primered F150 that says:

"When there's no more trees for paper towels, I'll wipe my ass with a spotted owl"

Also happens to be a huge chunk of Bush voter demography.


-Bam

 

[Annie]

Historically speaking, I'm a bit tired of the 'America is the only country to have employed nuclear weapons'. Japan was given warning, then a bomb was dropped. Their response was to 'keep going' then another bomb was dropped. They didn't know that was 'it' but their response was capitulation. Good for all of us.

It was the times, and it was an 'unknown' for all sides. No apologies necessary.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by bamthin
It's the opposite of a terbacky spittin', gun totin', pickup drivin', GED earning, cross burnin', guy with a bumper sticker on the back of his primered F150 that says:

"When there's no more trees for paper towels, I'll wipe my ass with a spotted owl"

Also happens to be a huge chunk of Bush voter demography.


-Bam

And yet the fellow you just described will always get more respect than the typical treehugging, drooling, foaming at the mouth liberals. Sucks to always be on the losing end, doesn't it?

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And yet the fellow you just described will always get more respect than the typical treehugging, drooling, foaming at the mouth liberals. Sucks to always be on the losing end, doesn't it?

The respect only lasts until the tornado wipes out the trailer park. What was this losing end you are refering to?

-Bam

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by bamthin
The respect only lasts until the tornado wipes out the trailer park. What was this losing end you are refering to?

-Bam

I was speaking about you foaming at the mouth liberals being the laughing stock. Even a homeless trailer owner would likely garner more respect. Tsk, tsk, sucks to be you!