The Nuclear Summit

[PanzerJaeger]

As everyone is probably aware, America's great president convened a summit in Washington to address the issue of nuclear proliferation. Well, the large gathering of world leaders wrapped up yesterday, but what was actually accomplished - apart from another glorious photo of our president bowing to yet another one of our creditors?



I tend to agree with Jon Kyl.

The summit's purported accomplishment is a nonbinding communique that largely restates current policy and makes no meaningful progress in dealing with nuclear terrorism threats or the ticking clock represented by Iran's nuclear weapons program.

[Lemur]

AWell, the large gathering of world leaders wrapped up yesterday, but what was actually accomplished - apart from another glorious photo of our president bowing to yet another one of our creditors?

Assuming this is something besides a rhetorical question:

During the summit, leaders of some countries made specific promises. Both the Ukraine and Canada vowed to get rid of their highly-enriched uranium.

The United States and Russia signed an update to a ten-year-old agreement to eliminate weapons-grade plutonium from their military programs.

[PanzerJaeger]

Awesome! I have been losing sleep over Canada's uranium stockpiles. Some of them are still pretty upset over the War of 1812.

[Lemur]

By all means, let us ignore the enriched uranium stockpiles around the world. After all, it's not as though anyone wants to do anything with them.

If I thought you had the slightest interest in nuclear issues, we'd have something to talk about, but let's be honest; this is just another platform for you to bash the Prez, nothing more or less. You claim that nothing was accomplished, literally: "what was actually accomplished". Your words. When they are refuted, you dodge into a bit of silliness about how enriched uranium stockpiles don't matter, betraying your utter lack of seriousness on the subject.

[Louis VI the Fat]

US diplomacy has made great strides the last year towards cooperation with China to thwart Iran´s nuclear ambitions.

Considering that a western boycott, technologically or economically, is useless when Tehran has the luxury of choice, this is a great step.



Few fear Canada*, or doubt its resolve to keep nuclear fuel out of the wrong hands. Canada may have agreed to send spent nuclear fuel to the US to make it politically palatable for the Ukraine to do the same. Such is my entirely subjective intuition at least.


*Except Canada´s environmental track record, which will destroy the world before a nuclear armaggedon does.

[PanzerJaeger]

Why so sour this wonderful spring morning?

By all means, let us ignore the enriched uranium stockpiles around the world. After all, it's not as though anyone wants to do anything with them.

Who said anything about ignoring them? I thought the point of this summit was to do something about them. Unfortunately, it seems to have accomplished very little. Hence the thread.. to discuss it.

If I thought you had the slightest interest in nuclear issues, we'd have something to talk about, but let's be honest; this is just another platform for you to bash the Prez, nothing more or less.

Actually, I was very hopeful that the summit might produce some tangible results. They are scant at best. So why shouldn't the president's performance be criticized? He promised the nation better results through diplomacy, but he doesn't appear to be particularly skilled at it.

As an aside, I have noticed that anytime anyone is critical of this president you launch in to rhetoric about how it has nothing to do with the issues and its all about him personally. Noted.

You claim that nothing was accomplished, literally: "what was actually accomplished". Your words. When they are refuted, you dodge into a bit of silliness about how enriched uranium stockpiles don't matter, betraying your utter lack of seriousness on the subject.

No, my response was a comical way of saying that the "accomplishments" of the summit were not particularly great.

[Lemur]

So why shouldn't the president's performance be criticized? He promised the nation better results through diplomacy, but he doesn't appear to be particularly skilled at it.

By what metric? What, exactly were you hoping for? If you want to be taken seriously, then propose something serious. Blanket criticisms of a man you despise don't count for much.

I have noticed that anytime anyone is critical of this president you launch in to rhetoric about how it has nothing to do with the issues and its all about him personally.

If your entire argument rests on the WND/FoxNews meme about bowing, well, you get what you paid for, which ain't much. Propose a serious argument and you'll get a serious response. Recycle rightist memes and you'll get a pimp slap.

Then dispense with ad hominem attacks and focus on substance.

And the substance is ...? Care to inject your deep understanding of nuclear proliferation issues here?

All we've done is relive certain, mostly friendly countries, of the burden of securing enriched uranium. It's like offering to collect used hypodermic needles so they don't was up on our shores. The truth is that this summit has done little to ensure our security.

Another deeply unserious response. Explain, in 200 words or less, why enriched uranium stockpiles are a concern for U.S.A. security.

[Vladimir]

By all means, let us ignore the enriched uranium stockpiles around the world. After all, it's not as though anyone wants to do anything with them.

If I thought you had the slightest interest in nuclear issues, we'd have something to talk about, but let's be honest; this is just another platform for you to bash the Prez, nothing more or less. You claim that nothing was accomplished, literally: "what was actually accomplished". Your words. When they are refuted, you dodge into a bit of silliness about how enriched uranium stockpiles don't matter, betraying your utter lack of seriousness on the subject.

Then dispense with ad hominem attacks and focus on substance. As he brilliantly illustrates, this summit is heavy on symbolism and short on substance. All we've done is relive certain, mostly friendly countries, of the burden of securing enriched uranium. It's like offering to collect used hypodermic needles so they don't was up on our shores. The truth is that this summit has done little to ensure our security. Proliferators are free to proliferate and China hasn’t moved an inch. It's another feel good and silly performance for the President. That's why he bows so much.

[rory_20_uk]

Is this aimed at all Presidents and their inability to scrap all WMDs in one fell swoop and balance the books, or merely as currently it's a Democrat who'se doing these things?

Of course it is rogue states with undeclared nuclear stockpiles that are dangerous, such as North Korea and Israel, of which neither countries leader attended.

But by reducing amounts in the world in other countries will apply political pressure to countries who are amenable to these things... not countries such as north Korea and Israel, of course.