Ah well the NPT...

Firstly it is a ridiculous document formulated to halt nuclear proliferation. It ALSO required a gradual disarmament of the nuclear capabilities of other nuclear nations.

That has NOT happened.

In fact the US has cosied up to two nations that have ALSO broken the treaty ( INdia Pakistan). Sure there was a hue and cry at the time, but both nations are now enjoying US patronage AND India has just signed a nuclear deal with the US. SO it seems that the gravity of the breach of the treaty is actually judged by the policy of the offending nation vis'a'vis the US.

SO to put forward the NPT as a justification for armed conflict and/or sanctions is just CONVENIENT.

The fact is that there is something awfully wrong in the UN . That is the SC. The 5 permanent members are a travesty to the concept of international justice and global democracy. In the UN every nation is equal.. but SOME nations are MORE equal than other. That would be the nations that hold the veto.

This arrangement was necessary in the post WW2 era. However it does NOT reflect the realities of today.

The NPT was formulated and promulgated by an organization that was and IS completely dominated by 5 nations.

It is inherently unfairly weighted in favor of the 5 permanent members of the SC. THe treaty was formulated by the 5 members allowing ONLY THEM the right to own nukes. That is neither fair, noe can any nation be expected to adhere to a treaty that allows rights for only a few chosen nations.

I think the NPT MUST be re-formulated. It must be tabled in the UN General Assembly. The SC should be abolished ( at the very LEAST the priveliged status of the 5 permamnent members should be abolished )

It is vital for world peace that nobody develops and proliferates nukes. However this agreement can only come by consensus on a forum of EQUALITY, with the SAME rules applying to ALL nations.

This stupidity of special dispensations for certain nations ( including the veto), not only diminishes the impartiality of the UN, but also makes the UN an impotent organization.

It makes a mockery of global democracy, and it makes the UN nothing more than a tool for the 5 permanent members to impose their will on the world AND it gives any dissenting nation the full right to dismiss it.

It's clear discrimination of the same order as blacks having to sit in the back of the bus. As the admin in the US was formed at the time, unless the blacks had agitated they would not have been able to change anything. WHy? Because the system was geared in such a way that only the white votes mattered. Just like only the 5 permanent members' vote really matters.

In the UN everybody else can take a running leap. What a joke.