LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 07-13-2012, 06:27 AM   #1
chelviweeme

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
480
Senior Member
Default The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty
There seems to be a lot of fear mongering about this among different news outlet. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...t-of-the-deal/

http://www.examiner.com/article/glob...u-s-gun-rights
chelviweeme is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 11:22 AM   #2
spamkillerf

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
607
Senior Member
Default
There seems to be a lot of fear mongering about this among different news outlet. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...t-of-the-deal/

http://www.examiner.com/article/glob...u-s-gun-rights
OMG, national sovereignty, DEBATE over. Signing up on the treaty would do nothing to US gun rights. Lots of nations are signed up for the UN, and most of them fail to pay their FEEsssssssssssssss. Lots of nations sign up for treaties and many of them do nothing.
spamkillerf is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 11:47 AM   #3
Evsltkzl

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
506
Senior Member
Default
There seems to be a lot of fear mongering about this among different news outlet. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...t-of-the-deal/

http://www.examiner.com/article/glob...u-s-gun-rights
Uhh, arms treaty chaired by Iran? And people wonder why i have no faith in UN. Shut it down and start over.

Will never be ratified by senate, UN can pass whatever it wants.
Evsltkzl is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 01:29 PM   #4
IoninnyHaro

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
377
Senior Member
Default
Uhh, arms treaty chaired by Iran? And people wonder why i have no faith in UN. Shut it down and start over.

Will never be ratified by senate, UN can pass whatever it wants.
Well, Iran has more credibility to chair a treaty restricting arms sales than the US or Israel.

The Right likes to pretend Fast and Furious is somehow a big deal, but the US has been selling arms to shady countries and warlords for decades.
IoninnyHaro is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 03:32 PM   #5
Evelinessa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
490
Senior Member
Default
Well, Iran has more credibility to chair a treaty restricting arms sales than the US or Israel.

The Right likes to pretend Fast and Furious is somehow a big deal, but the US has been selling arms to shady countries and warlords for decades.
It is cool man, keep taking up for Iran. Great thing is... your city is target #1. Something happens, it happens to you, not me. I will sleep like a baby and you will no longer make noise. Them's the facts, ignore at your peril, not mine. If I am wrong about Iran, no sweat... if you are wrong, you die. Keep appeasing them, appeasement has always worked so well before.
Evelinessa is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 03:43 PM   #6
SmuffNuSMaxqh

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
587
Senior Member
Default
That was a rather right wing, sensationalist site, so don't panic yet!

The US of A has a long history of ignoring the UN and any sanctions or moves they don't agree with - don't see why this should be any different [this site REALLY needs a 'yawn' or 'bored' icon ]
SmuffNuSMaxqh is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 03:47 PM   #7
Guloqkcm

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
516
Senior Member
Default
That was a rather right wing, sensationalist site, so don't panic yet!

The US of A has a long history of ignoring the UN and any sanctions or moves they don't agree with - don't see why this should be any different [this site REALLY needs a 'yawn' or 'bored' icon ]
As I have said numerous times. The US leaves the UN, the UN ceases to be. Put stock in the UN if you want, I don't care.
Guloqkcm is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 04:26 PM   #8
reaciciomarep

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
391
Senior Member
Default
So, the USoA is no longer behind it's debts to the UN by hundreds of millions of bucks?
If the USoA wanted rid of the UN, they would just need to recind the agreement to provide a location for their headquarters. That would also remove the problem of foreign idiots abusing the local laws and people while claiming 'diplomatic immunity' - heck, that'd be a good reason right there, IMO.

One good reason for the USoA to stay in the UN is their veto vote, without that, there would be a lot more chance of other nations agreeing to actions, sanctione, etc, that would be against their interests. There would also be a greater chance that the USoA would be left on it's own when chasing it's interests.
reaciciomarep is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 08:15 PM   #9
koebforfrn

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
478
Senior Member
Default
It is cool man, keep taking up for Iran. Great thing is... your city is target #1. Something happens, it happens to you, not me. I will sleep like a baby and you will no longer make noise. Them's the facts, ignore at your peril, not mine. If I am wrong about Iran, no sweat... if you are wrong, you die. Keep appeasing them, appeasement has always worked so well before.
Lol, what universe do you live in?

I'm pretty sure you have a worse chance of getting struck by lightning than dying from a terrorist attack. But keep the fear mongering up!
koebforfrn is offline


Old 07-13-2012, 10:30 PM   #10
toreesi

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
595
Senior Member
Default
UN is nothing but farce and big expensive joke from the day one.

Superpower(s) military might is what it counts.
toreesi is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 02:15 AM   #11
chuecfafresslds

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
578
Senior Member
Default
Lol, what universe do you live in?

I'm pretty sure you have a worse chance of getting struck by lightning than dying from a terrorist attack. But keep the fear mongering up!
You do for sure. There is no reason for a terrorist to worry about michigan. You are already imploding
chuecfafresslds is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 04:49 AM   #12
GoveMoony

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
470
Senior Member
Default
You do for sure. There is no reason for a terrorist to worry about michigan. You are already imploding
Michigan ? Not to far from me,interesting, thnx Zed.
GoveMoony is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 06:18 AM   #13
beloveds

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
591
Senior Member
Default
It is cool man, keep taking up for Iran. Great thing is... your city is target #1. Something happens, it happens to you, not me. I will sleep like a baby and you will no longer make noise. Them's the facts, ignore at your peril, not mine. If I am wrong about Iran, no sweat... if you are wrong, you die. Keep appeasing them, appeasement has always worked so well before.
You are bats**t insane. Thankfully, it seems that Americans are slowly becoming aware of the fact that the far right poses a greater threat to this country than any terrorist.
beloveds is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 06:23 AM   #14
Zdmlscid

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
384
Senior Member
Default
It is cool man, keep taking up for Iran. Great thing is... your city is target #1. Something happens, it happens to you, not me. I will sleep like a baby and you will no longer make noise. Them's the facts, ignore at your peril, not mine. If I am wrong about Iran, no sweat... if you are wrong, you die. Keep appeasing them, appeasement has always worked so well before.
Lets just say in some crazy parallel universe this Treaty passes. While the NRA would lead us to believe gun rights will be eroded, it looks like the issue here is more or less developed countries arming others for political gain (Libya and Syria as a present example). I'm trying to understand the correlation between this treaty and somehow our right to bear arms being revoked.
Zdmlscid is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 06:46 AM   #15
Druspills

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
353
Senior Member
Default
Lets just say in some crazy parallel universe this Treaty passes. While the NRA would lead us to believe gun rights will be eroded, it looks like the issue here is more or less developed countries arming others for political gain (Libya and Syria as a present example). I'm trying to understand the correlation between this treaty and somehow our right to bear arms being revoked.
Because it is about registering every piece of ammo and every gun. There is only 1 reason to create a registry of that kind, and it is to have the future ability to take them away. I have no problem with people in the US deciding a registry of the sort is ok (They will have to make some constitutional changes, though,) I have a huge problem with the UN nitwits (pushed by Soros, and he isn't anti gun in the extreme at all is he?) doing it. The UN can pass it, we won't. Call me crazy, when I see government fail and fail and fail and fail, regardless who is in office, more government is not an answer that comes to my mind.

Remember, I am on record saying bubba in the back woods of florida shouldn't be allowed to have a 200 gun arsenal in his insecure garage. I am no gun nut, but I am not an idiot either. If you can't see through this bills purpose, that is your problem, not mine.
Druspills is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 06:58 AM   #16
Finkevannon

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
461
Senior Member
Default
Because it is about registering every piece of ammo and every gun. There is only 1 reason to create a registry of that kind, and it is to have the future ability to take them away. I have no problem with people in the US deciding a registry of the sort is ok (They will have to make some constitutional changes, though,) I have a huge problem with the UN nitwits (pushed by Soros, and he isn't anti gun in the extreme at all is he?) doing it. The UN can pass it, we won't. Call me crazy, when I see government fail and fail and fail and fail, regardless who is in office, more government is not an answer that comes to my mind.

Remember, I am on record saying bubba in the back woods of florida shouldn't be allowed to have a 200 gun arsenal in his insecure garage. I am no gun nut, but I am not an idiot either. If you can't see through this bills purpose, that is your problem, not mine.
But the private sector is just as corrupt as government, so in essence there really is no right side of the coin. Registering every piece of ammo is impossible, and from my understanding the Treaty is geared more towards the prevention of arming nations for political gain than anything else. I'm not saying I agree with it, but wack jobs like the NRA's Wayne LaPierre have explicit financial motivations for arming as many people as humanly possible. He mine as well be a Smith & Wesson lobbyist.
Finkevannon is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 07:39 AM   #17
fount_pirat

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
618
Senior Member
Default
I am far more concerned with government overreach than under reach. There is no backtracking government overreach. You can sue the private sector, you can't do squat to the government. Remember Obama's view of the patriot act pre election? Now, what is his view?
fount_pirat is offline


Old 07-14-2012, 07:45 AM   #18
NEronchik

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
404
Senior Member
Default
I am far more concerned with government overreach than under reach. There is no backtracking government overreach. You can sue the private sector, you can't do squat to the government. Remember Obama's view of the patriot act pre election? Now, what is his view?
We live in a Paranoid society. I am not a fan of anyone telling me what to do, but if you break it down into the most simplistic terms, what has actually changed IN YOUR LIFE in the past 10 years aside from maybe the price of gasoline and waiting a bit longer in line at the airport? It seems most people live in a reality-distortion-field that affects their outlook on just about everything.
NEronchik is offline


Old 07-15-2012, 03:26 AM   #19
QbCp7LaZ

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
490
Senior Member
Default
It seems like this applies more for nations that aren't even a member of the UN. If one is a member of the UN, would they even be allowed to do any of what they want to prevent?


Maybe this could really hurt US deals to other nations. Maybe no longer be able to sell arms to nations in the middle east. I remember seeing the Egyptian uprising and the military using M1 Abrams we sold them. Plus we give billions away to nations, they could just end up using that money to buy weapons from nations that ignore the UN treaty.
Shoot, all these weapons that are used in these bad countries use guns, tanks and vehicles that originated from Russia, China and former Eastern Bloc countries.


Seems more like a piece of mind to feel like they are doing something good. Make themselves feel better about themselves. If they wanted to really help, they would inject REAL help into some of these countries like Somalia and not let them be a lawless wasteland for decades.
QbCp7LaZ is offline


Old 07-15-2012, 04:10 AM   #20
k1ePRlda

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
455
Senior Member
Default
first we have

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18822957

`USA further oil sanctions iran etc etc`

but in smaller and less seen news we had:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...sanctions.html

China, Singapore Exempted From U.S. Iran Oil Sanctions in fact the top 20 buyers of iranian oil are all exempted from these sanctions...

and want to really believe the news?

China’s crude imports from Iran rose 35 per cent in May from a month earlier, returning to levels, 522,000 barrels per day, on par with last year.
no one has done anything to get these ` exemptions` as quite honestly the countries involved would simply ignore the USA anyway.
k1ePRlda is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity