There has been talk that the goal of the current John Kerry led Department of State is to get Iran to sign the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and then the whole issue of Iran building nuclear weapons will be resolved upon their promise by signature to that document, or words to this effect. Really?
The Financial Times of London recently interviewed iranian President Hassan Rouhani concerning its nuclear program and its intents there, as well as bringing up the Syrian War Crisis.
http://video.ft.com/v/2878742620001
While talking "Peace", it is sufficient to say that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's facial language betrays his internal intent all too clearly. Psychological Operations (Psy - Ops) Warfare predates the Cold War between the United States and the Communists of the Soviet Union and China. And many of its applications and techniques are readily available and made known to the general public at large. Those who wish and want to know, in the Western World, from a public library or through retail purchases or via the internet, can know to even an excellent proficiency (depending on source material, dedication, base subject intelligence and ability to thought rationalization and problem solving processing capability).
The Washington Free Beacon reports
This action of "appease first, the negotiate" appears to follow the illegally appointed Secretary of State John Kerry's lead. In the first
Presidential debate between Senator John Kerry, and President George W. Bush,
Senator Kerry laid out what is now the Obama 100% assured for failure
policy.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/10/01/transcript-video-debate-1/
Have The Pacifists So Soon Forgotten The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Violations By The United States, U.S.S.R., United Kingdom, and China?
There has been the
erroneous claim that if Iran sets their diplomatic pen to the 1968 NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty, http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/index.html
Even at the lowest of the selected age spectrum, of those as young as 45 and upwards from there, we have all seen and been cognizant of the SALT II Treaty. Most of us have been cognizant of the SALT I Treaty whether we wanted to be or not. The issue freaked most of the nation out at the time, and the 3 major networks that WAS television at the time (CBS, NBC, ABC) made it a very big deal and impression in the midst of a protracted U.S.- Vietnam War. Anyone who lived the 1970s and paid any attention to the newspapers, the television and news radio, or had a subscription to TIME Magazine or what have you, could not escape being aware of SALT I and SALT II
and what they were all about. In spite of signing a nuclear non-proliferation Treaty by the two principal powers, the United States and the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic, treated that same Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as if it were toilet paper: even more worthless than Prime Minister Chamberlain’s 1938 Peace Accord with Adolf Hitler, because in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968, both parties had no intention of honoring what they agreed to. That Treaty was for others to sign and follow.
3 (U) Under New START Treaty counting rules, each deployed heavy bomber counts as one deployed nuclear warhead."
Then on November 27, 2012, we have the Internal Security Advisory Board (ISAB) report being asked to assess a strategic reduction of all United States Nuclear Weapons to very low numbers or to even zero (pp. 17-18 of the pdf)
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/201403.pdf
Some Pacifists today, like those over at Ron Paul's Institute,
are upset that current Republican Party's House of Representatives Majority Leader Eric Cantor mistrusts the Iranians, and they cite that words, mere words in the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty in Article 4
is sufficient to stop the Iranians from breaking that promise. Talk about naive. This is precisely just one example among many as to why Ron Paul never got more national backing. Here is the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty and what countries signed it, ratified it, and when. More comments will follow below this insert.
Signed at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968
Ratification advised by U.S. Senate March 13, 1969
Ratified by U.S. President November 24, 1969
U.S. ratification deposited at Washington, London, and Moscow March 5, 1970
Proclaimed by U.S. President March 5, 1970
Entered into force March 5, 1970
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2013 69: 75 (@ page 76, paragraph 2)
The Financial Times of London recently interviewed iranian President Hassan Rouhani concerning its nuclear program and its intents there, as well as bringing up the Syrian War Crisis.
http://video.ft.com/v/2878742620001
While talking "Peace", it is sufficient to say that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's facial language betrays his internal intent all too clearly. Psychological Operations (Psy - Ops) Warfare predates the Cold War between the United States and the Communists of the Soviet Union and China. And many of its applications and techniques are readily available and made known to the general public at large. Those who wish and want to know, in the Western World, from a public library or through retail purchases or via the internet, can know to even an excellent proficiency (depending on source material, dedication, base subject intelligence and ability to thought rationalization and problem solving processing capability).
The Washington Free Beacon reports
that the immediate windfall of Obama's recent release of sanctions against Iran begins with an extra 500,000 barrels of oil sales per day for at least the next 6 months.
Even prior to negotiations, as a condition just for talking with them, the Iranians insisted on and got the release of an Iranian nuclear scientist Mojtaba Atarodi. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/11/29/U-S-Released-IranianScientist-As-Part-Of-Nuke-Talks-Before-Geneva-Agreement
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/10/01/transcript-video-debate-1/
LEHRER: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
KERRY: With respect to Iran, the British, French, and
Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States,
regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran.
I believe we could have done better.
I think the United States
should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see
whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they
weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together. The
president did nothing.
The current apparent "Kerry Policy on Iran" as instituted,
appears to begin first with a full
compromise to allow Iran to NOT have economic sanctions, and later to even
provide them with even MORE nuclear material under a “trust” that it will be
for peaceful purposes, when they are on record demanding the nuclear
destruction of both Israel and the United States of America in the name of the
coming final and Great Anti-Christ or Mahdi of Islam, and of their ideas of what is moral to them to do.
The deception is evident in the Financial Times interview Psy-Ops Facial language of Iranian President Rouhani at the first link given above
(and available there only for as long as the FT retains it there).
There is a clear and genuine concern, frankness, truthfulness, when Iranian President Hassan Rouhani first discusses the invasion of foreign terrorists into Syria. This is the honesty marker and baseline by which Psy-Ops then measures the rest of the interview. When Rouhani says he will use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only, he is almost off the scales with deception. When Iranian President Rouhani says he will talk to the United States and Syria, he says so in a disgusted way that is in excess of 60% that makes his comments highly probable that he would, even though he clearly detests both nations. That detesting of both Saudi Arabia and the United States running off the Psy-Ops baseline for the interview in the context of what was being discussed, tells those in the Community and then others they inform if they will bother to relay the information, that no deal with Rouhani can be trusted to be honored by the Iranians...not even one that in anyway in regard to themselves or in regard to their (for once) "good guy rescue" role to a wronged by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia regional ally of theirs.
Have The Pacifists So Soon Forgotten The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Violations By The United States, U.S.S.R., United Kingdom, and China?
and that this somehow means that the Iranians are now "suddenly" honest in their intent to
develop their nuclear material only for peaceful purposes. Anyone intelligent and informed individual or group of individuals (such as a think tank) of people over the age of 45 in
this nation has no excuse to believe this nonsense. None.
Even at the lowest of the selected age spectrum, of those as young as 45 and upwards from there, we have all seen and been cognizant of the SALT II Treaty. Most of us have been cognizant of the SALT I Treaty whether we wanted to be or not. The issue freaked most of the nation out at the time, and the 3 major networks that WAS television at the time (CBS, NBC, ABC) made it a very big deal and impression in the midst of a protracted U.S.- Vietnam War. Anyone who lived the 1970s and paid any attention to the newspapers, the television and news radio, or had a subscription to TIME Magazine or what have you, could not escape being aware of SALT I and SALT II
Strategic Arms Limitation
Talks (SALT I & II)
The Strategic Arms
Limitation Talks II (which was never finalized under the excuse that it was because the U.S.S.R. invaded Afghanistan) had to remind the U.S. and U.S.S.R. to be
“Mindful
of
their obligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons…”
because they we technically
in chronic violation of the same Treaty, even though they would not directly say it that bluntly.
Article IV
1.
Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right
of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity
with articles I and II of this Treaty.
2.
All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to
participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and
scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear
energy.
Article VI
Each
of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on
effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early
date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete
disarmament under strict and effective international control.
By an emphasis of
Article 4.1,.2; it is clear that the presumption was a curbing and then a
stopping of new weapons of war at an “early date” as stated in Article 6 of the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Also,
in SALT II we are told that in 1979, the intent of SALT II was about
"Reaffirming
their desire to take measures for the further limitation and for the further
reduction of strategic arms, having in mind the goal of achieving general and
complete disarmament,
Declaring
their intention to undertake in the near future negotiations further to limit
and further to reduce strategic offensive arms,"
limitations that never
took place until the Arms Race created a bankruptcy condition upon the U.S.S.R.
that de facto ended the Nuclear Arms race between the two powers.
In December of 2010,
the U.S. Department of Defense, released this short video:
But 1550 Nukes aren't really 1550 Nukes under the Obama
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty upon the United States.
No.
When I stated that the START Treaty pushed by Obama counted as one nuke, http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2010/12/obama-on-behalf-of-russia-suckers.html
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/02/see-i-told-you-soobama-unilaterally-is.html
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/12/obama-20-world-where-united-states-has.html
I was NOT kidding nor exaggerating. NOT even slightly.
A May 2012 Classified Report to Congress, redacted and de-classified and released on September 20, 2012, under the Freedom of Information Act http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/nukes/nuclearweapons/DOD2012_RussianNukes.pdf states twice on page 2 that conventional heavy bombers are THEMSELVES counted as if a nuclear weapon:
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/02/see-i-told-you-soobama-unilaterally-is.html
http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/12/obama-20-world-where-united-states-has.html
I was NOT kidding nor exaggerating. NOT even slightly.
A May 2012 Classified Report to Congress, redacted and de-classified and released on September 20, 2012, under the Freedom of Information Act http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/nukes/nuclearweapons/DOD2012_RussianNukes.pdf states twice on page 2 that conventional heavy bombers are THEMSELVES counted as if a nuclear weapon:
Note that under New START Treaty counting rules... "each deployed nuclear capable heavy bomber counts as one nuclear warhead·…
3 (U) Under New START Treaty counting rules, each deployed heavy bomber counts as one deployed nuclear warhead."
Then on November 27, 2012, we have the Internal Security Advisory Board (ISAB) report being asked to assess a strategic reduction of all United States Nuclear Weapons to very low numbers or to even zero (pp. 17-18 of the pdf)
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/201403.pdf
While Obama disarms the U.S. Military, he gives every advantage to its enemies to go ahead and do a first strike or develop nukes so it CAN do a first strike on the U.S., with an eventual "no retaliation" capability on our part. And the leaders in the Federal Government behave as if they have been dopified on prescription drugs, or utterly corrupted, or brainwashed or perhaps even scared into just pretending it all isn't happening.
Some Pacifists today, like those over at Ron Paul's Institute,
are upset that current Republican Party's House of Representatives Majority Leader Eric Cantor mistrusts the Iranians, and they cite that words, mere words in the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty in Article 4
Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the
inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research,
production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without
discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this Treaty.
is sufficient to stop the Iranians from breaking that promise. Talk about naive. This is precisely just one example among many as to why Ron Paul never got more national backing. Here is the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty and what countries signed it, ratified it, and when. More comments will follow below this insert.
TREATY ON THE
NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Signed at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968
Ratification advised by U.S. Senate March 13, 1969
Ratified by U.S. President November 24, 1969
U.S. ratification deposited at Washington, London, and Moscow March 5, 1970
Proclaimed by U.S. President March 5, 1970
Entered into force March 5, 1970
The States concluding
this Treaty, hereinafter referred to as the "Parties to the Treaty",
Considering the
devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the
consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to
take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,
Believing that the
proliferation of nuclear weapons would seriously enhance the danger of nuclear
war,
In conformity with
resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly calling for the conclusion
of an agreement on the prevention of wider dissemination of nuclear weapons,
Undertaking to cooperate
in facilitating the application of International Atomic Energy Agency
safeguards on peaceful nuclear activities,
Expressing their support
for research, development and other efforts to further the application, within
the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards system, of
the principle of safeguarding effectively the flow of source and special
fissionable materials by use of instruments and other techniques at certain strategic
points,
Affirming the principle
that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any
technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from
the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful
purposes to all Parties of the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear
weapon States,
Convinced that, in
furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to
participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and
to contribute alone or in cooperation with other States to, the further
development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,
Declaring their
intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear
arms race and to undertake effective measures in the direction of nuclear
disarmament,
Urging the cooperation
of all States in the attainment of this objective,
Recalling the
determination expressed by the Parties to the 1963 Treaty banning nuclear
weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water in its Preamble
to seek to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons
for all time and to continue negotiations to this end,
Desiring to further the
easing of international tension and the strengthening of trust between States
in order to facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the
liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national
arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a
Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective
international control,
Recalling that, in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner
inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the
establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be
promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the worlds human and
economic resources,
Have agreed as follows:
Article I
Each nuclear-weapon
State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient
whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over
such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way
to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear weapon State to manufacture or
otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or
control over such weapons or explosive devices.
Article II
Each non-nuclear-weapon
State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any
transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or
of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not
to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive
devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of
nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.
Article III
1. Each
non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards,
as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the
International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the
International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agencys safeguards system, for the
exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed
under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful
uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Procedures for the
safeguards required by this article shall be followed with respect to source or
special fissionable material whether it is being produced, processed or used in
any principal nuclear facility or is outside any such facility. The safeguards
required by this article shall be applied to all source or special fissionable
material in all peaceful nuclear activities within the territory of such State,
under its jurisdiction, or carried out under its control anywhere.
2. Each State Party to
the Treaty undertakes not to provide: (a) source or special fissionable
material, or (b) equipment or material especially designed or prepared for the
processing, use or production of special fissionable material, to any
non-nuclear-weapon State for peaceful purposes, unless the source or special
fissionable material shall be subject to the safeguards required by this
article.
3. The safeguards
required by this article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply
with article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or
technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the
field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear
material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear
material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this
article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the
Treaty.
4. Non-nuclear-weapon States
Party to the Treaty shall conclude agreements with the International Atomic
Energy Agency to meet the requirements of this article either individually or
together with other States in accordance with the Statute of the International
Atomic Energy Agency. Negotiation of such agreements shall commence within 180
days from the original entry into force of this Treaty. For States depositing
their instruments of ratification or accession after the 180-day period,
negotiation of such agreements shall commence not later than the date of such
deposit. Such agreements shall enter into force not later than eighteen months
after the date of initiation of negotiations.
Article IV
1. Nothing in this
Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the
Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy
for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I
and II of this Treaty.
2. All the Parties to
the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the
fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and
technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to
the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or
together with other States or international organizations to the further
development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,
especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty,
with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.
Article V
Each party to the Treaty
undertakes to take appropriate measures to ensure that, in accordance with this
Treaty, under appropriate international observation and through appropriate
international procedures, potential benefits from any peaceful applications of
nuclear explosions will be made available to non-nuclear-weapon States Party to
the Treaty on a nondiscriminatory basis and that the charge to such Parties for
the explosive devices used will be as low as possible and exclude any charge
for research and development. Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty
shall be able to obtain such benefits, pursuant to a special international
agreement or agreements, through an appropriate international body with
adequate representation of non-nuclear-weapon States. Negotiations on this
subject shall commence as soon as possible after the Treaty enters into force.
Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty so desiring may also obtain such
benefits pursuant to bilateral agreements.
Article VI
Each of the Parties to
the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective
measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to
nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under
strict and effective international control.
Article VII
Nothing in this Treaty
affects the right of any group of States to conclude regional treaties in order
to assure the total absence of nuclear weapons in their respective territories.
Article VIII
1. Any Party to the
Treaty may propose amendments to this Treaty. The text of any proposed
amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary Governments which shall
circulate it to all Parties to the Treaty. Thereupon, if requested to do so by
one-third or more of the Parties to the Treaty, the Depositary Governments
shall convene a conference, to which they shall invite all the Parties to the
Treaty, to consider such an amendment.
2. Any amendment to this
Treaty must be approved by a majority of the votes of all the Parties to the
Treaty, including the votes of all nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty
and all other Parties which, on the date the amendment is circulated, are
members of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The amendment shall enter into force for each Party that deposits its
instrument of ratification of the amendment upon the deposit of such
instruments of ratification by a majority of all the Parties, including the
instruments of ratification of all nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty
and all other Parties which, on the date the amendment is circulated, are
members of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Thereafter, it shall enter into force for any other Party upon the deposit of
its instrument of ratification of the amendment.
3. Five years after the
entry into force of this Treaty, a conference of Parties to the Treaty shall be
held in Geneva, Switzerland, in order to review the operation of this Treaty
with a view to assuring that the purposes of the Preamble and the provisions of
the Treaty are being realized. At intervals of five years thereafter, a
majority of the Parties to the Treaty may obtain, by submitting a proposal to
this effect to the Depositary Governments, the convening of further conferences
with the same objective of reviewing the operation of the Treaty.
Article IX
1. This Treaty shall be
open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign the Treaty
before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article may
accede to it at any time.
2. This Treaty shall be
subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification and
instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Governments of the United
States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which are hereby designated the
Depositary Governments.
3. This Treaty shall
enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which
are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to
this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the
purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured
and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to
January 1, 1967.
4. For States whose
instruments of ratification or accession are deposited subsequent to the entry
into force of this Treaty, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit
of their instruments of ratification or accession.
5. The Depositary
Governments shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date
of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or of
accession, the date of the entry into force of this Treaty, and the date of
receipt of any requests for convening a conference or other notices.
6. This Treaty shall be
registered by the Depositary Governments pursuant to article 102 of the Charter
of the United Nations.
Article X
1. Each Party shall in
exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty
if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this
Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give
notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United
Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a
statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its
supreme interests.
2. Twenty-five years
after the entry into force of the Treaty, a conference shall be convened to
decide whether the Treaty shall continue in force indefinitely, or shall be
extended for an additional fixed period or periods. This decision shall be
taken by a majority of the Parties to the Treaty.
Article XI
This Treaty, the
English, Russian, French, Spanish and Chinese texts of which are equally
authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the Depositary Governments.
Duly certified copies of this Treaty shall be transmitted by the Depositary
Governments to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, duly authorized, have signed
this Treaty.
DONE in triplicate, at the cities of Washington,
London and Moscow, this first day of July one thousand nine hundred
sixty-eight.
SIGNATORIES AND PARTIES TO THE TREATY ON
THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
__________________________
TOTAL: 185 (Total does
not include Taiwan or SFR Yugoslavia, which has dissolved.)
NOTES:
a - Dates given are
the earliest dates on which a country signed the Treaty or deposited its
instrument of ratification or accession.
-- whether in
Washington, London, or Moscow. In the case of a country that was a dependent
territory which became a party through succession, the date given is the date
on which the country gave notice that it would continue to be bound by the
terms of the Treaty.
b - Effective
11/25/75.
1 With Statement.
2 The former German Democratic Republic, which
united with the Federal Republic of Germany on 10/3/90, had signed the NPT on
7/1/68 and deposited its instrument of ratification on 10/31/69.
3 Extended to Netherlands Antilles and Aruba.
4 Extended to Aguilla and territories under the
territorial sovereignty of the United Kingdom.
5 Russia has given notice that it would
continue to exercise the rights and fulfill the obligations of the former
Soviet Union arising from the NPT.
6 The Republic of Yemen resulted from the union
of the Yemen Arab Republic and the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen. The
table indicates the date of signature and ratification by the People's
Democratic Republic of Yemen; the first of these two states to become a party
to the NPT. The Yemen Arab Republic signed the NPT on 9/23/68 and deposited
its instrument of ratification on 5/14/86.
7 On 1/27/70, an instrument of ratification was
deposited in the name of the Republic of China. Effective 1/1/79, the United
States recognized the People's Republic of China as the sole legal government
of China. The authorities on Taiwan state that they will continue to abide by
the provisions of the Treaty and the United States regards them as bound by
the obligations imposed by the Treaty.
* Entries with
asterisk have NPT safeguards agreements that have entered into force as of
10/31/92.
** Non-NPT, full-scope
safeguards agreement in force.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
So, whatever happened to The United States and the
Soviet Union as 1968 original member signatories? Did they stop
proliferating or producing Nuclear
Weapons? What the hell were the Nixon SALT
I and the Carter SALT II treaties all about if we weren’t still creating and
developing these arsenals because the two nations diplomatically signed a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that was adhered to? Yeah, only it wasn't adhered to, not even for a few years.
“Overall, today’s warhead inventories are
considerably
lower than the Cold War peak of more than 70,000
warheads in the mid-1980s….”
lower than the Cold War peak of more than 70,000
warheads in the mid-1980s….”
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2013 69: 75 (@ page 76, paragraph 2)
Hans
M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris
Global
nuclear weapons inventories, 1945-2013
And NOW, in 2013 ff., we are just supposed to stupidly and unthinkingly accept that Iran is
just going to keep to a non-proliferation treaty that even the 2 principle
signers of the pact could NOT keep to for just 3 years before having to sign a
reduction in nuclear warhead rate of speed proliferation treaty? Yeah,
right. Give me a break.
Despite also signing in 1968,
the British Government also ignored the self-same Treaty:
(See the opening sentence in the ff. pdf on page 69 @
Despite also signing in 1968,
the British Government also ignored the self-same Treaty:
(See the opening sentence in the ff. pdf on page 69 @
the Chinese signed in 1995, and in the very opening sentence
regarding China in 2013, we read:
“Abstract
The number of weapons in China’s nuclear arsenal is slowly growing, and the capability of those weapons is also increasing.”
Hans M. Kristensen, and Robert
S. Norris
Chinese nuclear forces, 2013
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2013 69:79-85 (at
page 79).
Signing the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or any
other Treaty by Iran or the United States or any other
country without a determined measure of retaliation and
punishment for violating it, therefore means nothing,
except as a Public Relations means of
"excuse convenience" for those who wish to foster or
further lying to the public.
That's my input.
[Last updated at 6:02 p.m. Pacific]
other Treaty by Iran or the United States or any other
country without a determined measure of retaliation and
punishment for violating it, therefore means nothing,
except as a Public Relations means of
"excuse convenience" for those who wish to foster or
further lying to the public.
That's my input.
[Last updated at 6:02 p.m. Pacific]
No comments:
Post a Comment