It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US, Japan 'to call for nuke-free world'

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   

US, Japan 'to call for nuke-free world'


www.heraldsun.com.au

US President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama plan to issue a joint statement calling for a world without nuclear weapons when they hold talks overnight, reports said.
In the statement, tentatively entitled the US-Japan joint initiative for a nuclear-free world, they would welcome rising international momentum toward arms reduction and non-proliferation, the Yomiuri daily newspaper said today.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Here's the chance for the Nobel Peace Prize winner to show some real leadership.

Can we all expect that Obama will announce, tomorrow, that he will be dismantling the US stockpile of weapons? No? Why not?

Is this a case of Obama and the US waiting for everyone else in the world to get rid of their weapons, before the US gets rid of its own? In which case, other countries will wait until the US has confrimed their weapons destroyed... so in the end, no one gets rid of anything because they're all waiting for someone else to make the first move...

At least Obama's made another headline about some quasi move for peace.

www.heraldsun.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Good idea...
Who is gonna go 1st?

Let's draw Nuclear straws...
BTW, Russia just called and said they cannot make it this evening to play.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Here's the chance for the Nobel Peace Prize winner to show some real leadership.


I respect these moves a lot but.. Are the Yanks going to give up their nukes? Doubtful.. and the world is pretty sick of the 'Do as I say, not as I do' attitude.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Banning nukes across the world is like banning guns in a city. Only the law-abiding will not have them. Only criminals, thugs and sociopaths will have them.

Granted, a real psycho isnt going to care about mutually assured destruction but the threat of it is a better deterrent than a strongly worded letter from the UN.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I believe that will be wrong because without nuclear weapons Russia and China can invade the US without problems



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Well, if it were my country, I would make sure of what Iranian interests were in the US and sieze them before I started a war with them. I'm not talking about the people, just the property of Iranian Business so that any business of theirs does not get conducted on US soil.


Well....sorry everyone....I was on the wrong thread. This was not suppose to be in this thread. Again, Sorry.

[edit on 12-11-2009 by wdkirk]



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
The star wars things floating in orbit around the globe should be dismantled first if he really wanted to make a start.

And Russia just announced they wanted more subs with ICBM's




[edit on 12-11-2009 by Grey Magic]



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by wdkirk
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Well, if it were my country, I would make sure of what Iranian interests were in the US and sieze them before I started a war with them. I'm not talking about the people, just the property of Iranian Business so that any business of theirs does not get conducted on US soil.



Now why in the world would you do that? How in the world does this topic have anything to do with Iran? The US Media is the utter champion in brainwashing, I must say. The word 'nuclear' is now associated with 'Iran', well done Zionists. Let's seize Iranian businesses for Iran having "nuclear weapons" like we did with India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, and the other countries who have nuclear weapons... oh wait.... we haven't done that at all. What is the source of your hypocrisy?



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
I believe that will be wrong because without nuclear weapons Russia and China can invade the US without problems


And who says Russia or China want to invade the US??

Contrary to popular belief in the US of A, Russia is now a pacified nation and China is only interested in making money..

No other powers care about invasion and war except the US and UK. Thats propaganda to make you support your military and its actions around the world.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TSawyer
 


Well, I was on the wrong thread.....darn....sorry folks....move along...nothing here to see.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Dermo
 


Well you better inform the Russians and Chinese that they are peaceful because they keep investing in new weapons.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
except america....



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Oh crap not again. Now there is going to be a run on all the Nuclear Weapons Stores as people look to stock up before the ban takes effect!

All the best Nukes are going to sell out over night and then it will be a months long waiting list to only get a rationed portion of the Nukes you really want.

I think they just say things like this to increase business to tell you the truth!



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by Dermo
 


Well you better inform the Russians and Chinese that they are peaceful because they keep investing in new weapons.


Yea, I wonder why that is.. **USA**

The Irish army invests in new weapons and training regularly.. does that mean anything other than that they are keeping with the times?

Russia is only interested in making money, modernizing and becoming tighter trade partners with the EU.

To be fair, noone really knows what China's intentions are but it seems that they are more interested in becoming an economic powerhouse than destroying that opportunity over the next half century by getting into a war.. common sense really.

The US has a policy to destabilize these countries and actions. Noone else is an aggressor. That has been shown over and over for the past two decades.

[edit on 12/11/09 by Dermo]



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
YEAH, who is going first? This is like the Climate-thing. Why would the USA reduce CO2 and cripple our economy while India & China do nothing? Same thing. Why would WE reduce our nuke-supply if everyone else is trying to stock up? for what?



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 



Can we all expect that Obama will announce, tomorrow, that he will be dismantling the US stockpile of weapons? No? Why not?


Haha, the US would probably have a military coup before that happens!


At least Obama's made another headline about some quasi move for peace.


More utter tripe by saint Obama, he can talk peace and get awards, yet never achieves any of his foreign policies.

We all want rid of nukes, but we all need another deterrent for war first, such as enlightenment... and that's probably gonna' take much much longer than our own lifetimes.

[edit on 12-11-2009 by john124]



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Words are there to make the masses happy, actions are there to control the masses.

That is all I have to say in regards to this subject..



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Lets look at this from a different point of view. A nuclear missile is like the bullet of a gun, there is the missile part, that is the shell and then the bullet. The last time we saw a reduction in the number of nuclear weapons was between the US and the Soviet Union, in an attempted to reduce down the numbers. Ok, I am all for reducing down the numbers, however, here is the trillion dollar question, what do you do with the part that goes boom, the radioactive material that is so toxic, that the dust could kill by breathing it in. How do you guarantee the security of such and how do you dispose of it all? Then there is the lill problem of how do you stop another country who wants a nuclear weapon from getting such? As it has been shown, with the down fall of the Soviet Union, there has been several nuclear weapons that either went missing, or the housing has degraded. As much as it is nice to say get rid of them, no one has come up with how to get rid of the nuclear materials.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Lets look at this from a different point of view. A nuclear missile is like the bullet of a gun, there is the missile part, that is the shell and then the bullet. The last time we saw a reduction in the number of nuclear weapons was between the US and the Soviet Union, in an attempted to reduce down the numbers. Ok, I am all for reducing down the numbers, however, here is the trillion dollar question, what do you do with the part that goes boom, the radioactive material that is so toxic, that the dust could kill by breathing it in. How do you guarantee the security of such and how do you dispose of it all? Then there is the lill problem of how do you stop another country who wants a nuclear weapon from getting such? As it has been shown, with the down fall of the Soviet Union, there has been several nuclear weapons that either went missing, or the housing has degraded. As much as it is nice to say get rid of them, no one has come up with how to get rid of the nuclear materials.

And that is where the experts (who get paid with tax payer's money) comes in.

My opinion..
All WMD should be banned, as simple as that.. We have spend too much time and effort in trying to find away to destroy other human beings.




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join