[extropy-chat] nuclear non-proliferation as energy strategy ?

Samantha Atkins sjatkins at mac.com
Wed Jan 18 04:29:27 UTC 2006

On Jan 17, 2006, at 6:27 PM, Herb Martin wrote:

>> From: Samantha Atkins
>> We slap a label on a country and expect the normal rules not to
>> apply.  Very neat.  A much scarier country that already has nukes is
>> Pakistan.   But they are our good buds.  Israel is a major
>> international outlaw by the number and scope of UN resolutions they
>> have violated but they have had nukes since at least the sixties and
>> are one of the most heavily militarized countries per capita on the
>> planet.
> The above is either sophomoric or dishonest
> since Israel is NOT a frequent violator of
> BINDING UN resolutions, nor a signatory to the

Watch out expunging my motives or using denigration toward me of any  
kind.  I will not stand for it.

If you are talking of a Security Council resolution as "binding" it  
should be pointed out that although the US would very likely veto any  
such resolution that was too onerous there have in fact been quite  
some number of Security Council resolutions that Israel has violated  
or is in violation of until this very day.   From 1967 to 1988 the  
Security Council passed 88 resolutions directly against Israel and  
Israel was condemned 49 times.   That looks a little significant to me.

   Check out wikipedia:



Israel violated the following Security Council resolutions:

Resolution 252 (1968) Israel
Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind measures that change the legal  
status of Jerusalem, including the expropriation of land and  
properties thereon.

262 (1968) Israel
Calls upon Israel to pay compensation to Lebanon for destruction of  
airliners at Beirut International Airport.

267 (1969) Israel
Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind measures seeking to change the  
legal status of occupied East Jerusalem.

271 (1969) Israel
Reiterates calls to rescind measures seeking to change the legal  
status of occupied East Jerusalem and calls on Israel to scrupulously  
abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding the responsibilities  
of occupying powers.

298 (1971) Israel
Reiterates demand that Israel rescind measures seeking to change the  
legal status of occupied East Jerusalem.

446 (1979) Israel
Calls upon Israel to scrupulously abide by the Fourth Geneva  
Convention regarding the responsibilities of occupying powers, to  
rescind previous measures that violate these relevant provisions, and  
"in particular, not to transport parts of its civilian population  
into the occupied Arab territories."

452 (1979) Israel
Calls on the government of Israel to cease, on an urgent basis, the  
establishment, construction, and planning of settlements in the Arab  
territories, occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.

465 (1980) Israel
Reiterates previous resolutions on Israel's settlements policy.

471 (1980) Israel
Demands prosecution of those involved in assassination attempts of  
West Bank leaders and compensation for damages; reiterates demands to  
abide by Fourth Geneva Convention.

484 (1980) Israel
Reiterates request that Israel abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

487 (1981) Israel
Calls upon Israel to place its nuclear facilities under the safeguard  
of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency.

497 (1981) Israel
Demands that Israel rescind its decision to impose its domestic laws  
in the occupied Syrian Golan region.

541 (1983) Turkey
Reiterates the need for compliance with prior resolutions and demands  
that the declaration of an independent Turkish Cypriot state be  

550 (1984) Turkey
Reiterates UNSC resolution 541 and insists that member states may  
"not to facilitate or in any way assist" the secessionist entity.

573 (1985) Israel
Calls on Israel to pay compensation for human and material losses  
from its attack against Tunisia and to refrain from all such attacks  
or threats of attacks against other nations.

592 (1986) Israel
Insists Israel abide by the Fourth Geneva Conventions in East  
Jerusalem and other occupied territories.

605 (1987) Israel
"Calls once more upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide  
immediately and scrupulously by the Geneva Convention relative to the  
Protection of Civilian Persons in Times of War, and to desist  
forthwith from its policies and practices that are in violations of  
the provisions of the Convention."

607 (1986) Israel
Reiterates calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention  
and to cease its practice of deportations from occupied Arab  

608 (1988) Israel
Reiterates call for Israel to cease its deportations.

636 (1989) Israel
Reiterates call for Israel to cease its deportations.

641 (1989) Israel
Reiterates previous resolutions calling on Israel to desist in its  

694 (1991) Israel
Reiterates that Israel "must refrain from deporting any Palestinian  
civilian from the occupied territories and ensure the safe and  
immediate return of all those deported."


You may wish to quibble about what "is" is or what is "binding" but  
it was certainly not at all dishonest or "sophomoric" to point out  
that Israel violates UN resolutions.

> The petty dictatorships that make up the bulk
> of the UN member states can vote anything they
> please, sensible or not, but all of that is
> NON-BINDING on member nations.

This is more than a bit of over-simplification on your part.

> The Israelis are militarized because ALL of their
> neighbors (and secondary neighbors) want to,
> or have wanted to, throw them into the sea or
> MURDER them.

The Israelis have done more than their share of murdering and  
invading their neighbors.  Do you concede this or do I need to lay it  
out for you?

> Iran has signed nuclear non-proliferation agreements
> benefited from those agreements.

And this is supposed to be worse than Israel not even being a  
signatory how?

> And remember that "mobilization" has long been
> considered an act of war -- development of nuclear
> weapons by a state which did not have them can
> certainly be considered to constitute mobilization.

No it can't.

> Bottom line:  Iran and North Korea cannot be trusted
> with nuclear weapons and if they can be removed they
> should be removed.

Even if you plunge the world into the abyss to do so?  Even if Iran  
can be easily prevented from building its own nuclear weapons without  
a shot fired?  (as if that was remotely what the saber rattling was  
really about)

> Funny that largely the same people that would allow
> nuclear weapons to such states are typically the
> same people that would argue against the individual
> right of human beings to keep and bear arms.

You really have no friggin' idea who I am do you? I am a staunch 2nd  
amendment advocate and I have enough hardware to prove that that is  
not simply a paper position.   What I am tired of is supposed  
defenders of freedom and enlightenment who seem to never meet an  
excuse to pour money and lives out  anywhere in the world while  
taking away what paltry freedoms we still have at home that they  
don't applaud.

- samantha 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060117/01b62259/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list