There has been a report that next Month the Chair of the UN Committee
on Chemical Weapons will be Syria !

Hmmm, can that be really true ?
Had a quick search to no avail.
It is as bad as Saudi Arabia was chair at one time of the Human Rights
committee.
It is real Lewis Carrol stuff. It must make good ideas for a modern day Lewis Carrol.
Who would be the Red Queen ?

Dear Bazz,

Settle down old salt, you will do yourself an injury.

These are the rules for this body;

"When the Conference is in session, the Presidency of the Conference shall rotate among all its members; each President shall preside for a four-working-week period. The rotation which began in January 1979, based on the English alphabetical list of membership, shall be followed."

As you can see they were set out nearly 4 decades ago and agreed upon by all members. The Secretary General may well speak to how inappropriate this would be but ultimately it is the member states, not he, who can act to change them.

The whole format of a rotating chair is part of the premise of the UN. It invites participation and somewhat alleviates bullying by more powerful nations. But just like democracy throwing up a Trump outliers like Syria do unfortunately happen. No need to attack the institution like you are and besides your hatred of them stems from the UN support of particularly Muslim refugees and their denouncement of Australia's actions so perhaps stick to that in future.

//It is real Lewis Carrol stuff. It must make good ideas for a modern day Lewis Carrol.//

Nah, Alice in Wonderland is all about maths:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427391-600-alices-adventures-in-algebra-wonderland-solved/

US Ambassador to the UN Disarmament Conference that is
scheduled for next month, Robert Wood, clearly stated
on April 9th 2018 that Syria is not qualified to head
the Conference in light of its alleged chemical attack
recently on residents of a Damascus suburb. He said that
Syria has neither the international credibility nor any
moral authority while it continues to bomb its own
people with chemical weapons.

The Conference's Presidency is rotated among the 65 member
states based on an alphabetical order. Syria is to take over
from Switzerland on May 28th for 4 weeks.

Interesting, so it was true.
It would be interesting to make a list of UN committees that had
inappropriate chairman.
Yes, I knew those positions rotated. If a matter concerning their own
country is on the agenda does the chairman do the normal thing and
stand down and allow someone else to chair the meeting ?

Bazz, as someone who deplores the use of all weapons, including chemical, I believe it is much more constructive to include nations like Syria in the UN process. Rather than place rogue nations on the outer, where the possibility of influencing their behaviour is greatly diminished, including them on an equal basis is far more productive. Expulsion should be the last resort when all other peaceful avenues have been exhausted.

Paul, who mentioned expulsion ?
Surely you would not approve Syria being chair of a meeting on chemical weapons ?
Just let them sit there and cop it.
If they gave unsatisfactory explanations then they should not be on that committee.

I agree with Paul on this one.

It is more productive to include Syria in this.
It's only for 4 weeks - and who knows, it may
influence their future behaviour to some extent
if they realise that they are being monitored
internationally, and judged.

How interesting.

Our lefties & greenies all approve of the UN, the most corrupt organisation yet developed by man.

Apparently anything that will further socialism/communism is ok by them, no matter how disastrous it has been for all but the elites.

Useful idiots all.

Goodness me Foxy, they already know they are being monitored but they
do not give a damn about that !
You cannot have a chairman of a meeting being the subject of the meeting discussion.
It just does not work and that is why it is standard practise for such
a chairman to stand down.

Dear Bazz,

I hear what you're saying, however how can you get someone
to stand down when they won't admit to any wrongdoing?
Take Mr Putin and Russia as an example. Look at all the
atrocities they've committed. Yet they still maintain a
place internationally and strive for "respectability" on the
global scene.

Foxy, you do not understand.
They can ONLY defend themselves IF they stand down.
They cannot defend themselves from the chair.
The chairman can rule comments, motions and statements out of order.
Read Roberts rules.
That is why it is a universal rule in ALL organisations.

Syria seems like the perfect chairmen. After all, they don't have any chemical weapons.

Don't you recall that Mr Obama assured us that his brilliant diplomacy had caused the Syrians to give up all their chemical weapons which was why he didn't need to enforce his red line. He did this with the co-operation of that other exemplar of truth and virtue, Mr Putin.

To believe otherwise would be to think that Mr Obama lied to the world...and that just can't be true.

It's all fake news - ask Mr Trump.

Good to see North Korea's Kim Jong-un meeting South Korea's Moon Jae at the boarder between their two countries as a precursor to peace talks. What guns and bombs failed to achieve, possibly a handshake between two old enemies will, we can only hope.

A comment please Foxy. I know you want peace in the world as much as I do.

Dear Paul,

Of course I want peace in the world. And we're not
alone in this. For millennia people have hoped for peace
in their time.

Today, we have two vital elements for international
peace-making in place. The first is the United Nations,
which provides a forum for world opinion and a mechanism
for conflict resolution. The second is a body of
international law that specifies the rights and
obligations that nations have toward one another - particularly
with respect to aggression.

However a major difficulty with international peace-making
is that compliance with the resolutions of the UN and the
rulings of its World Court are voluntary, for no country
is willing to surrender its sovereignty to an international
body.

The UN is most effective when the superpowers are able to agree
on a course of action and mobilize their blocs to support
it. Even so, the organisation does provide an influential
forum for world opinion, and while it doesn't always prevent
war, it surely helps make it less likely.

Hopefully, something positive just may come out of the
meeting of two previous enemies. We'll have to wait and
see.

"Good to see North Korea's Kim Jong-un meeting South Korea's Moon Jae at the boarder between their two countries as a precursor to peace talks."

Thank you Mr Trump.

"Please do not forget the great help that my good friend,
President Xi (Jinping) of China...particularly at the
border of North Korea. Without him it would have been a much
longer, tougher, process!"

Thank You President Xi.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/north-korea-south-korea-donald-trump-korean-war-nuclear-weapons-a8326321.html

"Thank You President Xi."

Yes Xi, under pressure from Trump has certainly been forced to finally help resolve this problem.

I think that Trump said some things in public that were only ever said
previously in diplomatese and being prompted publicly made it
impossible for Xi to ignore.
Xi may not have liked it, but on the subject of nuclear weapons
I don't think you can be too shy to say it out loud.

Perhaps someone who has read his book on business negotiation may see a reflection here

Of course Kim Jong-un & Moon Jae have never been real enemies in fact. They have perpetuated a very old conflict for domestic political reasons. After all, they were only children, or not even born, when the fighting in Korea ended 65 years ago.

It is the fact that they believe Trump will lower the boom on either or both that has forced then to negotiation, & very little else.

The man is a wonder, & only the useful idiots, or those with an axe to grind, or who's scam is being dismantled, will say otherwise.

Yes, the man is a wonder allright. No denying that.
Scandals, massive staff exodus, blasts on twitter,
constantly at very public loggerheads, perceived
instability all round.

The picture shows a President who doesn't read enough
to be given thorough briefings, who makes snap
judgements (nobody is quite sure what these judgements
are based on) and then changes his mind. Who is extremely
confident of his own acumen and little interested in the
opinion of others and whose staffers, even the anti-establishment
types, often look with contempt at their boss whenever they
are off the record.

Michael Wolff wrote a book about Trump. "Fire and Fury."
Perhaps you may have heard of it? It really describes what
a "wonder" the President really is, and paints an
accurate picture of life in the White House under this
President.

Foxy you are still refusing to ever look at anything other than with the left eye. You really need to open the other one to get a balanced view.

Only viewing things from a heavily biased direction makes a fool of those who do it. Just look at Paul & Steely. If ever either of them ever saw the world, & the left leadership as it really is, they would probably die of the shock.

Dear Hassie,

You know that I always read your posts
and take what you say on board.
But in this case, I do have both my eyes
open. But perhaps I'm looking at things
through a different prism to you. Or
perhaps my expectations of an American
President are greater. In either case,
we don't always have to agree on things.

Dear mhaze,

Oh good lord my dear fellow, how on earth have the fatuous flailings of a blowhard president had any role in bringing North Korea to the table? Don't be a fool.

In reality what they have done is shaken the South enough to cause them to make the overtures because they know an all out war would be devastating for them. They have tried to gain some control of the situation and effectively drag Trump kicking and screaming into the mix.

What the North have always said is that they would not negotiate without a clear path toward getting the Yanks off the peninsula. The South and the US annually hold the world's largest war games complete with invasion practice just below the border. The also continue to make daily fighter jet flights directly at the same.

What do you think the words “A Nuclear Free Peninsula” mean? That will entail the US committing to moving all nuclear armed shipping, missiles and planes from the area in exchange for the North giving up its weapons.

It is something the North has been striving for for well over a decade and it looks like it might be a possibility.

Remember the behind the scenes deal to stop the Russians in Cuba was that the US would remove all nuclear weapons from Turkey within 6 months which they did.

Poor SR, reduced to inanity to deny that the recent good news from NK is primarily due to Trump's diplomacy.

Of course, SR is so unalterably anti-Trump that there's isn't any chance that SR would be able to credit him with even a passing success. There's the old joke that's apropos here - if video emerged of Trump walking on water, SR would declare that its proof that Trump can't swim.

Roughly a year ago, when Trump lobbed a few missiles into Syria, I noted that it was a master-stroke in that the US's adversaries would be much more 'flexible' in the future. And so its come to pass.

China, fearing that Trump will follow through with his trade threats, have significantly increased the trade sanctions against Kim. As has the rest of the world.

And slowly the US has been increasing the pressure on the North.

Kim's main concern is to maintain his regime. Trump is making it clear that he has little interest in regime change while at the same time making it clear the regime has no future if it maintains its present coarse. Equally its clear that Kim needs economic help or, eventually, his nation and regime will collapse under the economy stranglehold being enforced.

SR is making up assertions that Kim wants nukes off the peninsula but that's rubbish. And indeed its Kim who is making concessions even before talks start, not the other way around as poor old SR fantasises.

In a little over a year Trump has made more progress toward resolving the Korean problem than his three predecessors did in 20 years.

But don't expect the likes of SR to acknowledge that or even understand it. They're still trying to work out while lobbing missiles into Syria was a success instead of the harbinger of war that they predicted or how Trump could destroy ISIS in such a short time while the 'experts' said it'd take many years.

President Moon said "I think President Trump deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks." But what would he know, eh?

I had not heard of Moon's praise of Trumps success mhaze. It looks like even the radical ratbag organisation that the UN has become, has read the tea leaves, & now realises they will have to modify their policies & stance, with a strong man, not a leftist dupe, in charge.

Perhaps they have realised that the UN can only exist with US generosity, & that the US is no longer prepared to be the whipping boy of dictators & con men.

Dear mhaze,

You seem a little triggered old chap. I'm not sure why as you seem to have accepted most of my positions on this since you have not offered anything substantial to disprove them.

You wrote;

“Roughly a year ago, when Trump lobbed a few missiles into Syria, I noted that it was a master-stroke in that the US's adversaries would be much more 'flexible' in the future. And so its come to pass.”

So this is why the Syrians dialed it up and used chemical weapons recently? Because they had been cowered into submission by those missiles? Trump diplomacy at work?

You also wrote;

“SR is making up assertions that Kim wants nukes off the peninsula but that's rubbish.”

Here is an AP report from a couple of days ago;

By ASSOCIATED PRESS April 27, 2018
(GOYANG, South Korea) — The two Koreas have agreed to rid their peninsula of nuclear weapons but failed to provide any new specific measures how to achieve that. A joint statement issued after their leaders’ talks Friday says the two Koreas confirmed their goal of achieving “a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula through complete denuclearization.” North Korea has placed its nukes up for negotiations. It has previously used the term “denuclearization” to say it can disarm only when the United States withdraws its 28,500 troops in South Korea.

I ask again; What do you think the words “A Nuclear Free Peninsula” mean?

Trump is of course getting played even more than the previous administrations but you will be there polishing his boots as always and blaming others when the whole show falls apart yet again.

That warm and fuzzy feeling you of the rabid right are now feeling is only Cousin Kimmy keeping himself warm burning some of those billions of Yankee dollars The Donald is feeding North Korea in return for ditching their war toys.

SR,

“A Nuclear Free Peninsula” mean? "

Well I'll play. It one of those expression that means whatever you want it to mean. Ask 5 people and you'll get 6 answers.

But to me it means exactly what it says. The Korean homeland without nukes on its land. If Kim wants that, he can have it tomorrow since he's the only one with nukes on the homeland.

That's why what you say is rubbish. IF Kim wants no nukes in Korea he can have it without needing to negotiate.

Kim wants his nukes but is prepared to negotiate them away in return for that which he really wants - security for his regime. That requires two things:

* guarantees that the US/SK won't seek regime change if he denuclearises. This is a tough(er) sell because of what happened to Qaddafi who gave up his nukes in return for similar guarantees only to see those utter fools Hillary/Obama take him out anyway. I'd imagine part of the guarantee will entail the US reducing its forces in SK, a move that suits Trump's aims anyway, as part of America first.
* Kim also needs an improving economy to alleviate the chances of an internal uprising. The pressures Trump has placed on NK through the sanctions and though forcing Xi to abide by his promises on sanctions has devastated the NK economy. Kim can't allow that to continue.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/952749/kim-jong-un-north-korea-mcdonalds-donald-trump-usa

"you seem to have accepted most of my positions "

Such as?

"So this is why the Syrians dialed it up and used chemical weapons recently?"

Check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

and see how the use of chemical weapons dramatically declined following the Trump intervention.

But the unthinking anti-Trump crowd operate on the basis that if it isn't a 100% success its a failure. Of course, that only applies to Trump.

"Donald Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize, says South Korean President Moon Jae-in" http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-30/trump-should-win-nobel-peace-prize-moon-says/9712590

Because Nobels are often give to those dragged "kicking and screaming" to the peace table.

Peace may not come, but Trump has bought the Koreas closer than ever before.

Dear Is Mise,

A chemical attack every month this year so far would not be my definition of success but as a Trump supporter you will obviously have a different metric.

At one stage the US had nearly 1000 nuclear weapons situated on the Korean Peninsula. These were gradually withdrawn as the umbrella was replaced by submarines and long range nuclear equipped bombers from Guam which regularly fly near the border.

“Nuclear free” would mean visits by a nuclear armed US Navy would cease and air operations halted, something the North Koreans have been demanding for many years.

By the way Moon Jae-in did not say Trump should get the Nobel Prize but rather when asked if he himself deserved it he replied;

“President Trump can take the Nobel prize. The only thing we need is peace.”

Which is a far cry from saying Trump really deserves it, more that if this process comes off and Trump accedes to Kim's demands and the North and South end up in peace then Trump can have the darn thing if that is what it takes.

Finally I did enjoy this little story;

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/trump-dictated-former-doctor-s-letter-praising-his-health-report?cid=trending

Sorry that should have been mhaze.

You are absolutely correct Steele. US posturing post WWII has been one of belligerence, and that includes the Korean Peninsula. The United States postwar revised its foreign policy from being one of a prewar isolationists, with a limited sphere of influence, although covert operations particularly in Central and South America were common. The US quickly become a direct aggressor who required little provocation to undertake either overt military action in places such as Korea and Vietnam, or covert operations launched by the CIA in many countries.
World War Three, the so called 'Cold War' cost in excess of 20 million lives and was the longest running modern war in history. The victor in WWIII was undoubtedly the United States, as it had been the supreme victor in WWII, and to a lesser extent WWI.
When it comes to the Cold War the US claimed that it was acting in ways to counter communist expansion, and local instability, that is true. What is also true is the US was acting at the same time to protect the assets and operations of thousands of its own transnational corporations, which have trillions of dollars worth of investments, throughout the world. Today there are new enemies, and a few old ones, that the US sees as necessary to deal with, North Korea included. China and Russia are going to be tougher nuts to crack, but Trump is working on that at the moment.

SR,

Well that didn't go so well,did it?

"At one stage the US had nearly 1000 nuclear weapons situated on the Korean Peninsula."

I suspected that you didn't initially know this which is why you were going on about Kim wanting a Nuke Free peninsula. So now your assertion is that the only thing the US needs to do is not send any nuke armed equipment into the region and Kim will give up his programme? And you wonder why I think that's rubbish.

Kim's only aim is to preserve his government. Anyone with a passing understanding of the Korean past knows this. And the task for Trump (with the help of Xi) is to convince him he can have what he wants if, and only if, he gives up his nuclear ambitions.

That's going to be a tall order but Trump is closer than anyone has been in the past 30 years. And he's there because of the successes of his policies.

You wrote :"By the way Moon Jae-in did not say Trump should get the Nobel Prize..."

Well that's open to interpretation. But he hasn't hasten to clarify his comments. What about this one...

"In January, Mr Moon said Mr Trump "deserves big credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks. It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure"."

You wrote :"Finally I did enjoy this little story;"

Yes I'm sure you enjoy all the snippets of fake news that comes out of the anti-Trump camp.

I on the other hand enjoyed this one this morning...

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/02/reuters-poll-black-male-approval-for-trump-doubles-in-one-week/

the UN is to busy dreaming up resolutions against the only civilised country in the Middle East (Israel) to be concerned about real threats. Even their own 'peacekeepers' have been into raping and pillaging the less fortunate. Oh sorry its only when deviants in the church that do this stuff that attracts the lefites attention.

runner I see your number three is off to face charges. Interesting.

why do new enemies appear? need peace

Sorry Paul i would think i am as close to the Catholic church as you. Their pedos groomed kids just like ty he perverts safe schools grooms kids. I think that sick program comes from labour/greens

mhaze,
I supported and defended Trump probably more than anyone else during the 2016 election, but I can only say he is a complete disappointment.

Armchair,

I can't really argue with such a fact laden analysis.

Dear mhaze,

Don't be a dolt.

The only place outside of Europe where US nuclear warheads are deployed is Turkey and it has been that way for a while. Even it Turkey it is only aircraft mountable bombs as missile launchers are not allowed.

I was referring to a New Zealand situation where visits from nuclearised ships or aircraft are banned.

The North Koreans are rightly concerned about US aggression and have been reacting accordingly. No surprises there. If the North can see a path where no nuclear weapons are permitted in the area and the highly aggressive war games played out each year are halted there may be a chance for movement, although I don't expect it will be substantial.

Of course Moon is going to massage Trump's ego as his obvious belligerence and grandstanding notwithstanding he is a big part of this deal getting done. But Moon was again very careful about his words, “It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure”. Note 'could'.

As to your link 22 extra black males gave a positive rating and you are claiming a seismic shift in sentiment? Get your hand off it.

So SR,

When you wrote:"That will entail the US committing to moving all nuclear armed shipping, missiles and planes from the area in exchange for the North giving up its weapons" you meant that, since the US doesn't have any such weapons in the area, they should move them anyway...or something. Because you totally knew there were no nukes there...or something.

Keep spruiking that one, SR, and you might even convince yourself of it.

As I said, Kim is in a bind created by Trump and his administration and is looking for a way out. No one should trust him, and Trump knows that better than most. So Kim will have to give up a lot to save his regime. But he can save it and that's the art of the deal.

The US will be going into this knowing that Kim can't be trusted so if there is to be denuclearisation they will adopt the Reagan policy of 'trust but verify'.
The recent revelations from Israel about the cheating by Iran on a similar issue shows that naive players like Obama can be duped. Trump isn't a naive player. He may not get a deal but he definitely won't make a bad deal, unlike Obama/Kerry.

"As to your link 22 extra black males gave a positive rating and you are claiming a seismic shift in sentiment? Get your hand off it."

I've noticed how you've become increasingly irate as your claims have been exposed as drivel. Masturbation 'jokes' now...really?

You do know how polls work don't you? Those 22 people proportionately represent the population. Do you understand that?
So this poll suggests that somewhere around 3.5million blacks changed their mind about Trump because a singer told them it was OK. Funny? Yes. Seismic shift? We'll see but probably no.

Well his foreign policy is schizophrenic does he think I'm applauding efforts to mess with other nuclear powers, secondly he supports Israel and the Saudis with their Wahhabism when he campaigned against wars and finally he won't fire anyone, and he should start with Sessions and appoint someone who will indict Hillary.

Dear mhaze,

My earlier reference was directed toward what the North Koreans want not the situation on the ground but believe what you want, I really don't care.

I have been enjoying far more detailed discussions over the Korean situation on another forum. It includes a number of Koreans one of whom is very supportive of South Korea's defense minister who wanted to revisit returning US nuclear missiles to his country. She has very zero trust in Kim and says the only way to get a true deal would be for the South to have nuclear missiles to give up. Failing that she wants her country to re-institute its own nuclear weapons program.

And let's deal with the so called 'masturbation joke'. This was a far cry from a joke rather it was a slightly oblique request that you stop being a w?nker. I will endevour to be more direct next time.