No action on Israels nuclear activities

#1
Nations pushing for a resolution labeling Israel's nuclear capabilities a threat on the final day of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) annual meeting were defeated on Friday.

The draft resolution, which also called upon Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, was backed by 15 Arab countries, along with Cuba, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia and Venezuela.

But Canada sponsored a 45-29 "no action" ballot that prevented member states from voting on the motion.

Among those supporting the effort to block the vote were the United States, Israel, France, Germany, Britain and Finland, which was at the conference on behalf of the European Union.

Nineteen countries, including Russia and India, abstained.

Milder resolution

The final session of the UN nuclear watchdog agency's weeklong meeting did pass a milder resolution on Israel which affirmed "the urgent need for all states in the Middle East to accept full-scope IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear activities".

The milder resolution - which had also been initiated by the nations behind the defeated resolution - was passed by 89 votes to two.

Israel and the United States were the two "no" votes.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/81A8D91D-D640-4883-B121-CD0FA10E2BE8.htm

Well done America, even the mildest resolution gets a no vote. There will never be even a glimmer of progress on this while Israel holds Nuclear capability in contravention of the IAEA.

You just wonder what the point of it all is :(
 
#3
So the fact that the resolution was backed by 15 arab countries says nothing to You PTP, along with the likes of Cuba (anti US), Indonesia(muslim), Iran(muslim AND anti US), Malaysia (muslim)and Venezuela (anti US).

The fact that CANADA sponsored the veto must count fror something - they are hardly Poodles of Bush OR Blair and finally the results of the blocking ballot was 45 for, 29 against - does the US have 45 poodles????
 
#4
I'm talking about the 2nd, virtually toothless resolution Sven.
 
#6
Why are Al-Jazeera scum press Moriarty?

I watch a good deal of Arab news, and scum press is not an epithet I'd level at Al-Jaz, when there are so many more worthy candidates around.
 
#7
PartTimePongo said:
Why are Al-Jazeera scum press Moriarty?
Well let me see. There code of ethics state:

Distinguish between news material, opinion and analysis to avoid the pitfalls of speculation and propaganda.

Well, there always willing to show many videos off British and American troops being killed by roadside bombs etc. Not propaganda for the other side ehh!!
 
#8
Mad_Moriarty said:
PartTimePongo said:
Why are Al-Jazeera scum press Moriarty?
Well let me see. There code of ethics state:

Distinguish between news material, opinion and analysis to avoid the pitfalls of speculation and propaganda.

Well, there always willing to show many videos off British and American troops being killed by roadside bombs etc. Not propaganda for the other side ehh!!
Exactly, Raghead TV isn't the most neutral of broadcasting sources just slightly biast towards the West and Israel only slightly....
 
#9
PTP, If you are going to quote on Arabic news websites, then you may wish to quote from the Asharq Al-Awsat website who are far more impartial on news coverage than Al-pro terrorist Jazeera!
 
#11
All that nonsense aside, given that we aren't really in a position to do much about a bunch of psychotic Arabs going nuclear, I really don't see a drama in allowing a reasonably mature, Middle Eastern, Western-values orientated democracy to crack on with it.
 
#12
PTP, If you are going to quote on Arabic news websites, then you may wish to quote from the Asharq Al-Awsat website who are far more impartial on news coverage than Al-pro terrorist Jazeera!
What I don't get is Why shouldn't the Western media be pro west, Its not but shouldn't it be ? Al Jazeera is overly pro Arab, there is nothing wrong with that and Al Jazeera should have the freedom to be that way(A western value) but to think their perspective is in the wests interest is crazy.
 
#13
Mad_Moriarty said:
PartTimePongo said:
Why are Al-Jazeera scum press Moriarty?
Well let me see. There code of ethics state:

Distinguish between news material, opinion and analysis to avoid the pitfalls of speculation and propaganda.

Well, there always willing to show many videos off British and American troops being killed by roadside bombs etc. Not propaganda for the other side ehh!!
Our news media is always quick to show the pictures of dead arabic chappies, so why should we expect arabic news channels to be any more honourable and decent than ours our.

Besides Al-Ja has more unbiased and informational reporting than the BBC, CNN or ABC these days.

Those points notwithstanding, I have absolutely no problem with a democratic and reasonably secular society possessing nukes (and using them) in their own defence. Especially when said country is surrounded by millions of psychotic, mumbo-jumbo believing, nutcases straight out of the Dark Ages, whose only technology that is being developed is nuclear.

Even more so when said democratic country is made up of the survivors of a race that already has faced one extermination attempt and clearly faces the severe likelihood of another at some point in the future.
 

Latest Threads