11 ms·

> then the US agrees is obligated to ask the UN to step in. No, UN has nothing to do with it and also point 2 talks about conventional weapons. If US is still

by type0 3y ago

> then the US agrees is obligated to ask the UN to step in. No, UN has nothing to do with it and also point 2 talks about conventional weapons. If US is still interested in limiting nuclear proliferation there's no other way than helping Ukraine with military aid to regain it's territory. Otherwise Ukrainians will develop nukes and the risks for nuclear war in Europe will skyrocket in a decade or so. Ukraine has enough Uranium and enough expertise, everyone telling this will not happen is kidding themselves. They might not disclose it (like Israel) but they certainly have plans for it if they don't restore their borders. If the memorandum is void we're back at it before 1994, in my opinion they already have the right to restore their nukes since they haven't received sufficient support in the War.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
read it for yourself. here is the origional (PDF page 169): https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/v3007.pdf https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/v... point 2 is that the US will not attack Ukraine (conventional or Nuclear). IT says nothing about defending them from others. Point 4 literally says the the US is obligated to seek UN security council action, verbatim. >the Russian federation, UK, and us reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate UN security council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non0nuclear weapon state party to the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a thread of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used I dont know how we can have a reasonable conversation if we cant agree on what simple and clear sentences mean. the US has no obligations to defend them from conventional war, or ensure their safety. To be clear, It is obvious that Russia is violating the treaty parts 1 and 2 by disrespecting the boarder, and using conventional force against Ukraine.

by type0 3y ago

s1artibartfast 3y ago

read it for yourself. here is the origional (PDF page 169): https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/v3007.pdf https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/v... point 2 is that the US will not attack Ukraine (conventional or Nuclear). IT says nothing about defending them from others. Point 4 literally says the the US is obligated to seek UN security council action, verbatim. >the Russian federation, UK, and us reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate UN security council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non0nuclear weapon state party to the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a thread of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used I dont know how we can have a reasonable conversation if we cant agree on what simple and clear sentences mean. the US has no obligations to defend them from conventional war, or ensure their safety. To be clear, It is obvious that Russia is violating the treaty parts 1 and 2 by disrespecting the boarder, and using conventional force against Ukraine.