• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

UN Vote ALL Nukes off. Perm-SC respond with, "Eh?"

#2
#3
The report doesn't make clear, is there any definition of what constitutes high alert or not? Does re-naming the "high alert status" as "standard readiness" satisfy this resolution?
 
#4
I would have thought that it would, but given the need for them to address this further, then I guess they think something else entirely.

Point is, there's still a good couple of 1,000 or so at launch readiness within minutes, so what they may be trying to do here to push that down further - thus our concept of standard readiness becomes closer to, under UN lock and key.

If you recall Putin gave stark warning a while back that Russia's high alert systems were still in place (around the time of the NK issue and chinese satellite shoot up), implying that nations shouldn't fcuk around carelessly with ICBM technology and detonation tests; lest it all goes pete tong.

Could this be aiming to set a tone to damp this all down, for all the SC? And if so, does that allow beligerant nations who are eyeballing the nuclear treadmill additional room for moving?

Either way, methinks the Perm-SC will have something interesting to talk about in their next close door session...
 
#5
I especially liked this little line from the article,
PR Inside said:
Assembly resolutions are not legally binding but they do reflect world opinion.
No it bloody doesn't. All it reflects is how the different government representatives voted on the issue on that day. China has around a quarter of the worlds population and they don't get to pick their own government, and by extension UN representatives and policies, so it's not really indicative of their views. Or how about all the TPLACs (Tin Pot Little African Countries) who have zero democratic choice either? This seems to be another manifestation of the political position that the UN can do no wrong or that they're the only legitimate stage/internationl body in international affairs. Which is laughable when you look at some of what they do.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top