why do some countries choose NOT to join the NPT

**Zakariya04** · 09-25-09, 01:19 PM

Dear Sciforumers

I hope all is well

just wondering why some nations choose not to join the NPT

there are only 3 of them i think india, pakistan and isreal.. and there all mates with the US

i dont want to know whether it is right or wrong but why they choose not too

take care
zak

**fedr808** · 09-25-09, 01:30 PM

Because Israel hasnt officially announced it...

**Zakariya04** · 09-25-09, 01:41 PM

fedex

hello there i hope all is ok for you

what havent they officially announced??
they r either in the NPT or not and they r not
so why r they not in the NPT is what i want to know

**fedr808** · 09-25-09, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Zakariya04

fedex

hello there i hope all is ok for you

what havent they officially announced??
they r either in the NPT or not and they r not
so why r they not in the NPT is what i want to know

To be in the NPT you should have nukes.

Israel has neither said "yes we have nukes" or "no we dont have nukes"

There is not much hard evidence to say they do, but technically they do have all the materials, skills, and know how to make them, and considering their predicament theres no reason not to make them.

And if you dont mind, i prefer "fedr" or even "fed"

**Zakariya04** · 09-25-09, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by fedr808

To be in the NPT you should have nukes.

humnmmmmmm a lot of shizzell u have chucked out your rectum there!!

so all the other countries in the world who are in the NPT (apart from Isreal, India and pakistan) have nukes do they??!!???

**spidergoat** · 09-25-09, 02:00 PM

Greetings, Zakariya04, hope all is well with you and your family, and the sun shines down on your glorious visage, god willing.

To answer your question, perhaps some countries do not join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because they want to proliferate? It can be a profitable business.

**fedr808** · 09-25-09, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Zakariya04

humnmmmmmm a lot of shizzell u have chucked out your rectum there!!

so all the other countries in the world who are in the NPT (apart from Isreal, India and pakistan) have nukes do they??!!???

Yah, I said that without thinking.

The reason Israel isnt joining is because of the fact they havent announced they have nukes.

Most everyone thinks that Israel ahs nukes but Israel hasnt admitted it yet.

Which means Israel wants to keep their stockpile a secret, and if they join NPT, people are gonna say TELL US THAT YOU HAVE NUKES!

If Israel says no, people are gonna present tons of evidence which most of it is false or questionable, and if Israel eventually uses said weapons they will be known as a liar.

If Israel says yes we have nukes, theyll be asked to say how many, where doy uo keep them, how far can they travel, what dispersal systems do you have, etc.

By just declining to say whether or not you have nukes you avoid what could be, a very sticky situation.

And there goes the whole secret.

The fourth country is North Korea by the way.

**fedr808** · 09-25-09, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Greetings, Zakariya04, hope all is well with you and your family, and the sun shines down on your glorious visage, god willing.

To answer your question, perhaps some countries do not join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because they want to proliferate? It can be a profitable business.

There are only four countries that havent signed it, and 3 say they do have nukes, and the fourth declines to answer the question.

**spidergoat** · 09-25-09, 02:07 PM

North Korea?

**S.A.M.** · 09-28-09, 12:50 AM

Its very simple. Countries choose not to join the NPT because it makes illegal those things which they can legally do otherwise.

And there is no penalty for those who don't

Why would anyone limit their options when there is no accountability for not doing so?

I bet Iran is cursing the day it signed the NPT.

**Zakariya04** · 09-28-09, 01:40 AM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Greetings, Zakariya04, hope all is well with you and your family, and the sun shines down on your glorious visage, god willing.

To answer your question, perhaps some countries do not join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because they want to proliferate? It can be a profitable business.

thank you for your greetings Spider i am well thank you i hope all is godo with you

Originally Posted by fedr808

Yah, I said that without thinking.

The reason Israel isnt joining is because of the fact they havent announced they have nukes.

Most everyone thinks that Israel ahs nukes but Israel hasnt admitted it yet.

Which means Israel wants to keep their stockpile a secret, and if they join NPT, people are gonna say TELL US THAT YOU HAVE NUKES!

If Israel says no, people are gonna present tons of evidence which most of it is false or questionable, and if Israel eventually uses said weapons they will be known as a liar.

If Israel says yes we have nukes, theyll be asked to say how many, where doy uo keep them, how far can they travel, what dispersal systems do you have, etc.

By just declining to say whether or not you have nukes you avoid what could be, a very sticky situation.

And there goes the whole secret.

The fourth country is North Korea by the way.

Lucky for israel they can keep the world gusessing without sanctions imposed on it or even the threat of sanctions!!!

Perhaps if Iran saya we neither trying to make nikes or not then maybe they will be left alone..if they neither denied or agreed they will be ok...

and thanks for advising on North Korea

Take care Zak

**CptBork** · 09-28-09, 02:42 AM

The NPT is an outdated concept. Non-nuclear countries signed on to that treaty because the existing nuclear powers were supposed to get rid of their own arsenals decades ago. Don't see why even existing members of the treaty should still sign on if the idea is just to maintain an exclusive club which holds the power to destroy everyone else at the push of a button. I'd rather see a new treaty that restricts the flow of nuclear technology from one nation to another, but each nation should be able to make up its own mind about whether they want to go for nukes, until such time as the big boys agree to dismantle their own arsenals.

Anyhow, given that we're stuck with the NPT and nothing's going to change any time soon, I think it would be in Israel's interests to sign on to the treaty, in exchange for major diplomatic concessions from all of its regional enemies, and a renewed recognition of its unquestionable sovereignty from the UN. It's not the UN's job to try and create favourable conditions for another arab attack, so they'll need to provide some guarantees against this outcome before Israel can be fairly asked to play ball.

**pjdude1219** · 09-28-09, 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by CptBork

The NPT is an outdated concept. Non-nuclear countries signed on to that treaty because the existing nuclear powers were supposed to get rid of their own arsenals decades ago. Don't see why even existing members of the treaty should still sign on if the idea is just to maintain an exclusive club which holds the power to destroy everyone else at the push of a button. I'd rather see a new treaty that restricts the flow of nuclear technology from one nation to another, but each nation should be able to make up its own mind about whether they want to go for nukes, until such time as the big boys agree to dismantle their own arsenals.

Anyhow, given that we're stuck with the NPT and nothing's going to change any time soon, I think it would be in Israel's interests to sign on to the treaty, in exchange for major diplomatic concessions from all of its regional enemies, and a renewed recognition of its unquestionable sovereignty from the UN. It's not the UN's job to try and create favourable conditions for another arab attack, so they'll need to provide some guarantees against this outcome before Israel can be fairly asked to play ball.

um Israel's sovreignity is questionable though.

**CptBork** · 09-28-09, 02:54 AM

Your sovereignty is also questionable.

**S.A.M.** · 09-28-09, 02:56 AM

a renewed recognition of its unquestionable sovereignty from the UN

since when is that the jurisdiction of the UN?

**CptBork** · 09-28-09, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

since when is that the jurisdiction of the UN?

If the UN isn't supposed to arbitrate international law, then who is? Is the NPT not a UN-based initiative? Is it not the UN that has been placed in charge of trying to enforce it?

**S.A.M.** · 09-28-09, 03:01 AM

Could you point out to me where in the UN charter this jurisdiction is covered?

**CptBork** · 09-28-09, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Could you point out to me where in the UN charter this jurisdiction is covered?

I wouldn't expect to find it in the charter, since from my understanding the NPT was signed well after its founding. I thought the idea was that when you want to force a country to comply with the NPT, you're supposed to refer it to the UN Security Council. Am I wrong? Is this just some sort of independent gentleman's agreement, like NAFTA or something? If it doesn't fall under UN jurisdiction, then who's going to force Israel to comply?

**pjdude1219** · 09-28-09, 03:08 AM

Originally Posted by CptBork

Your sovereignty is also questionable.

I'm sorry you dislike being corrected but its no reason to insult me at least that's what i think your doing. your post just doesn't make sense.

**S.A.M.** · 09-28-09, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by CptBork

I wouldn't expect to find it in the charter, since from my understanding the NPT was signed well after its founding. I thought the idea was that when you want to force a country to comply with the NPT, you're supposed to refer it to the UN Security Council. Am I wrong? Is this just some sort of independent gentleman's agreement, like NAFTA or something? If it doesn't fall under UN jurisdiction, then who's going to force Israel to comply?

Comply with what? How?