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.

 

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade


www.reuters.com

(Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
U.S. agrees to timetable for UN Gun Ban




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."

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



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Looks like a major power play headed our way... Keep an eye out.
Or two...

[edit on 19-5-2010 by Americanist]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Looks more like a gun ban coming to the US.

A liberal end-run on the Second Amendment by claiming the UN made us do it.

Won't work no one will turn in guns under orders of the UN and many would shoot anyone from the UN that tried to take them.




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Yep, this is it. They are coming after our guns. So many people made a run on guns last year that I am sure they can't wait to get rid of em. Ammo in my area doubled in price, so we got a reloading bench.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   
actually the way I read it

it's not a change of stance at all
it's just throwing the monkey
on somebody else's back with
the single nation veto clause.

They know it won't pass cuz
some terrorist regime in the UN
will veto it outright. It's
passing the buck however
noble it might appear.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
actually the way I read it

it's not a change of stance at all
it's just throwing the monkey
on somebody else's back with
the single nation veto clause.

They know it won't pass cuz
some terrorist regime in the UN
will veto it outright. It's
passing the buck however
noble it might appear.




Your take is plausible; however, you never know what the price tag is for regimes these days.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Americanist
 


Well there's two sides to this.

A) No other country in the world (at least that's a member of the UN) has the amount of firearm possession leeway and legal freedom for citizens to own and use guns as the US does. So this does impact the US citizen the most.

Countries like Britain, Australia, China or France make it harder to own a gun than it is to keep pet lions.

B) This would mean countries like Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Georgia (i.e. Western lackeys) would be considerably halted in updating their armed forces with 90% Western-supplied hardware, which I am 100% in favour of, as the last thing we need are more destablizing and potent forces within the Middle East.

[edit on 19/5/10 by The Godfather of Conspira]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
reply to post by Americanist
 


Well there's two sides to this.

A) No other country in the world (at least that's a member of the UN) has the amount of firearm possession leeway and legal freedom for citizens to own and use guns as the US does. So this does impact the US citizen the most.

Countries like Britain, Australia, China or France make it harder to own a gun than it is to keep pet lions.

B) This would mean countries like Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Georgia (i.e. Western lackeys) would be considerably halted in updating their armed forces with 90% Western-supplied hardware, which I am 100% in favour of, as the last thing we need are more destablizing and potent forces within the Middle East.

[edit on 19/5/10 by The Godfather of Conspira]


I'd hope to agree with you, but there are way too many AK's and arm dealers in this World to pick up the slack. I'm sure you realize the inherent problem.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join