Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (386757)	5/27/2008 7:49:39 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) of 1576340

"You would uphold a treaty the other side isn't keeping? " What treaty is that, Brumar? They didn't violate the word of the Framework. It didn't cover enrichment of uranium. Probably because a) that wasn't the immediate problem being addressed, and b) that was already covered with the NPT, of which NK was a signatory. Voiding the Framework was just the sort of Smirk stupidity that we have since gotten used to. Someone does something you don't like? Then find something unrelated to the issue, but something you wanted to change and then claim they are the same so you can do what you have been wanting to do all along. He was wanting to do something about the Framework all along. He used their violation of the NPT to cancel the Framework. He then used the winger blogs to conflate the issues and leave the impression that it was the Framework that was violated. And the weak-minded tracked along. "We're not talking about broaching the DMZ " Whoops. There goes the goal posts again. You wanted to know when we have held their feet to the fire over their attempts to cheat. I provided the canonical case. "When did the US successfully hold NK's feet to the fire over that?" With the Framework, Brumar. Their reactor was shutdown. Their reprocessing of plutonium was halted. They had stopped all development of plutonium based weapons. "We're not a non-nuclear signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty" Correct. However, we do have obligations. "They are. They've also violated the NPT treaty by trying to hide their enrichment program." Correct. "The IAEA and UNSC unaniminously agrees they're in violation." Correct. Ok. I will take this slow, Brumar. Because you seem to be unable to put all the pieces together. What is the only country to have withdrawn from the NPT? North Korea. What has the US done about it? Nothing. As near as i can tell, we haven't even officially protested this action. How important does the US think the NPT is? I'd say not very much. Given how we are in non-compliance with many parts of the NPT, I'd say there is even more proof. Despite your claims to the contrary, Iran isn't run by morons. If non-compliance is openly tolerated, why should they worry about it? This is the sort of thing that happens when we go around and stop taking our side of agreements seriously.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next