• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Israel be required to sign the NPT? [W:348]

Should Israel be required to sign the NPT

  • Total voters
    41
X Factor said:
No and let's not pretend that Israel is the same as Iran.
Click to expand...

Its not so much a case about whether they are the same but whether they should be held to the same standard (espicially if one is to enforce said standards on the other)
 
joG said:
I do not think that is a relevant argument. More that everyone has accepted India and Pakistan having the bomb.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comment about precedence earlier then, please explain.
 
Montecresto said:
Well, that's what I meant. Israel is one of our best paid prostitutes in the region. But other than Obama, and maybe Carter, there's been no real push against Israeli expansion. We'd be raising hell if Russia was pushing such expansions.
Click to expand...

Your approval of two U.S. presidents who have proven their resentment of Jews is revealing.
 
Montecresto said:
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comment about precedence earlier then, please explain.
Click to expand...

If everyone accepts India and Pakistan having nuclear weapons, on what grounds do you push Israel around? They are not threatening us.
 
Red_Dave said:
Its not so much a case about whether they are the same but whether they should be held to the same standard (espicially if one is to enforce said standards on the other)
Click to expand...

Let us hold them to the standard to which we hold peaceful countries like India.
 
MildSteel said:
I saw a story that talked about how the U.S. government recently released classified documents on Israel's nuclear program. Since its obvious that Israel has a nuclear weapons program, should they be required to sign the NPT?
Click to expand...
No.

I have never understood why any country would sign it, especially when the countries pushing it the most already have nuclear weapons. If I were a leader I would not put my country at that kind of a defensive disadvantage.

And the recent betrayal of Ukraine only reinforces and confirms my point of view.
 
Red_Dave said:
Its not so much a case about whether they are the same but whether they should be held to the same standard (espicially if one is to enforce said standards on the other)
Click to expand...

No one forced Iran into signing the NPT so you're not seeking equal standards between Israel and Iran (which is appalling on its own) but for special standards for Israel, as usual. A bit less dishonesty from time to time will be refreshing.
 
MildSteel said:
I saw a story that talked about how the U.S. government recently released classified documents on Israel's nuclear program. Since its obvious that Israel has a nuclear weapons program, should they be required to sign the NPT?
Click to expand...

Required by who and what would the benefit of the requirement be?

Since we are talking about the UN nations here we have to evaluate the "resolution request" and its origin (which was not offered as a requirement.) What we are really talking about here is a resolution that started with Egypt that has plenty of Arab nation support.

The main problem is it becomes dubious to suggest Israel is the sole problem as to why others in the middle east (and extended areas around) are pursuing the development of nuclear weapons. Primarily, India and Pakistan have not signed the agreement either and they both have them. Secondary, we have question on Iran's interests. Lastly, we are not so sure we can trust Syria in the long run.

The other problem is the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is inherently flawed. India argued this best, and it goes to the core of why the UN itself is flawed. The agreement basically condones a group of nations to have nuclear weapons and a larger group that does not. To restrict the development and possession of nuclear weapons argues that we trust those nations with them far more than the others, and as such the treaty is discriminatory and not universal in handling all those that sign it. That means there is no such thing as "balance and order" to the possession of these weapons that the treaty claims. We need to start being honest about this, either we all have them with some sort of international safeguard or no one has them at all. The treaty does not accomplish either, nor can it as designed from origination through implementation as of today.

Because of these concerns there is no real benefit to the region for Israel to subject themselves to the "safeguards" of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency given these flaws. I would even go so far as to suggest the US leave the resolution, clearly our international opposition is suspect no matter what the disposition of the agreement is around the globe. But for Israel, it creates a level of bureaucracy that Israel would have to deal with some of it's strongest enemies that would be associated to that bureaucracy via this flawed agreement. In this case I can clearly see the argument Israel would have about putting their stockpile under international supervision.

The other thing to keep in mind is how this latest round of using the NPT has played out. Not surprisingly the US voted against the measure, Canada on the other hand voting against it was a bit of a surprise.
 
PeteEU said:
Hell yes.. since the west almost "requires" countries like Iran and Pakistan to sign up, then why not Israel? After all Israel has actually sold nuclear tech to a hostile nation.. Iran and Pakistan has not..
Click to expand...

Pakistan has not signed the agreement, neither has India. Iran signing it is suspect.
 
joG said:
What would good would it be, if they signed? I do not see any advantage to anybody.
Click to expand...

Then what is the point or advantage of having the NPT treaty? Why on earth should we trust Israel more than Iran.. Iran has not attacked another nation in centuries.. Israel has. Why should we trust the US with nukes? or Russia?

Either you make a treaty that actually means something for all the makers of nukes, or you might as well just drop it.
 
There never has been a requirement that a potential or actual nuclear power sign the NPT. Signing the treaty is done on a strictly voluntary basis.

PeteEU said:
After all Israel has actually sold nuclear tech to a hostile nation.. Iran and Pakistan has not..
Click to expand...
The A. Q. Khan network (funded by the state of Pakistan) transferred nuclear technology and/or nuclear weapons technology to three nations (Iran, Libya, North Korea) and approached at least three others (Syria, Algeria, Saudi Arabia).
 
Simpleχity;1064327237 said:
There never has been a requirement that a potential or actual nuclear power sign the NPT. Signing the treaty is done on a strictly voluntary basis.
Click to expand...

Yes the main problem with the NPT.. it should not be voluntary.

The A. Q. Khan network (funded by the state of Pakistan) transferred nuclear technology and/or nuclear weapons technology to three nations (Iran, Libya, North Korea) and approached at least three others (Syria, Algeria, Saudi Arabia).
Click to expand...

And? Not sanctioned by the government. Plus there was sanctions put against Pakistan and India (until Bush removed them of course)...
 
PeteEU said:
Then what is the point or advantage of having the NPT treaty? Why on earth should we trust Israel more than Iran.. Iran has not attacked another nation in centuries.. Israel has. Why should we trust the US with nukes? or Russia?

Either you make a treaty that actually means something for all the makers of nukes, or you might as well just drop it.
Click to expand...

Who is "we"?
 
PeteEU said:
And? Not sanctioned by the government.
Click to expand...
Not officially in public, but there is no way Khan could have transferred Pakistani nuclear secrets (the Pakistani government refers to their nuclear technology as - our national pearls) without the ISI and the government being aware of his foreign undertakings.
 
MildSteel said:
I saw a story that talked about how the U.S. government recently released classified documents on Israel's nuclear program. Since its obvious that Israel has a nuclear weapons program, should they be required to sign the NPT?
Click to expand...

Of course they should. I'm not shocked we don't push it, but its only common sense.
 
Montecresto said:
Well, that's what I meant. Israel is one of our best paid prostitutes in the region. But other than Obama, and maybe Carter, there's been no real push against Israeli expansion. We'd be raising hell if Russia was pushing such expansions.
Click to expand...

Actually H. W. Bush stood up to them. He ended up being a one term President. That may have had something to do with it.
 
MildSteel said:
I saw a story that talked about how the U.S. government recently released classified documents on Israel's nuclear program. Since its obvious that Israel has a nuclear weapons program, should they be required to sign the NPT?
Click to expand...




No need. Israel will not use their nukes unless pressed to the wall, nor will they help our enemies obtain nukes, so it isn't a real concern.
 
joG said:
What hypocrisy? Placing something lower on your priority list does not mean you are a hypocrite. It only means you have different priorities.
Click to expand...

Your statement runs contrary to the alleged secret agreement that the U.S. has with Israel to shield Israel's nuclear program. Look everyone knows that the U.S. does not honest broker when it comes to Israel. It's hypocrisy pure and simple.
 
Goshin said:
No need. Israel will not use their nukes unless pressed to the wall, nor will they help our enemies obtain nukes, so it isn't a real concern.
Click to expand...

Says who? The Israeli government? Oh yeah, government, there's a source you can trust :roll:
 
radcen said:
No.

I have never understood why any country would sign it, especially when the countries pushing it the most already have nuclear weapons. If I were a leader I would not put my country at that kind of a defensive disadvantage.

And the recent betrayal of Ukraine only reinforces and confirms my point of view.
Click to expand...

It appears you think the NPT is useless. Do you think nuclear proliferation is practical? Should it be something that the human race accepts? If so, what will be the consequences in terms of the ability of the human race to survive?
 
MildSteel said:
I saw a story that talked about how the U.S. government recently released classified documents on Israel's nuclear program.
Since its obvious that Israel has a nuclear weapons program, should they be required to sign the NPT?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Who on this planet could enforce that requirement?

Not going to happen,not today, not tomorrow, not any time soon. :roll:

Wait and see.
 
PeteEU said:
Then what is the point or advantage of having the NPT treaty? Why on earth should we trust Israel more than Iran.. Iran has not attacked another nation in centuries.. Israel has. Why should we trust the US with nukes? or Russia?

Either you make a treaty that actually means something for all the makers of nukes, or you might as well just drop it.
Click to expand...

First what we agree on. If one signs a treaty it should apply to all that sign. If this is not the case, however, there can be different optimizing stragegies one can legitimately follow. Which to choose might depend on the circumstances. This is true also vs non signatories. There is no reason for instance to treat declared enemies wanting nukes the same as others. As a matter of fact, without further reasons, it would be silly to waste resources on fighting the ally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom