Group items tagged

Countries are allowed to sell weapons to Sudan, but only if they receive confirmation that these weapons won't end up in Darfur. Chinese bullets were found in Darfur, which may not be China's fault, but the fact that they were trying to suppress the information is suspicious.

I think that is weird; however, it reminds me of our country. We distribute weapons to so many places around the word and i highly doubt that we know where all the weapons end up. And because China's economy is driven by exports I would like to assume the best and say that China may have given weapons to someone that second hand distributed them to allow this to happen. I don't know. It just seems possible that way.

I'm guessing that the bullet wound up in Darfur because China wasn't careful enough about where they sold them to. This isn't a problem that only China has- I think that very many countries, probably including ours, need to be more careful about where they sell weapons to. It indicates a big problem if countries are willing to sell weapons into the wrong hands to get money.

Possible non-militant solution to Syria's chemical weapons. Met with skepticism from White House.

I think the divide among Syrian officials and Assad about ceding control of chemical weapons is very interesting. It seems that in addition to gaining Russia's support, Kerry's proposal has also gained the support of many of Syria's top officials including its foreign minister, Wallid al-Moallem. Nevertheless, it appears that Assad is still extremely against giving up Syria's chemical weapons, even if doing so would avert a U.S. strike on Syria.

chemical weapons

This article is about the US giving weapons to the Kurds to help them fight ISIS. It talks about how the US faces no threats while dropping the weapons and that they supplies dropped were highly needed. The Kurds are resisting ISIS from conquering their land. ISIS has sent in many troops into areas around Kurdish territories in an attempt to seize the land.

Israeli air force strikes military site in western Syria. Israel has got involved in the past if they were worried about chemical weapons. Scientific Studies and Research Center (SSRC) in Syria suspected of developing sarin gas weapon.

Both Japan and France rank in the top 50 for Global Peace Rankings-- Japan 8th and France 48th. The biggest difference in their rankings comes from France's possession of heavy and nuclear weapons. The Japanese have limited possession of heavy and nuclear weapons as a result of the pacifist constitution they were forced to adopt following WWII which limited their ability to arm for war. Furthermore, France is involved in more conflicts and exports more weapons than Japan, which is also heavily related to the restrictions placed on Japan following WWII. However, Japan has a worse record when it comes to relations with neighbors which may be related to actions from WWII and rising tensions between Japan, China, and South Korea. Yet, perhaps unrelated to WWII and relating more to culture of society, France has a higher level of violent demonstrations and internal organized conflict than Japan. Japan has a homogenous population that has a main focus of work and a culture that accepts the social and economic hierarchy, but France has a more heterogeneous population with many disenfranchised groups that were once colonized that continue to face discrimination.

The US has proposed blocking the flow of US arms into Saudi Arabia, but the UK will not do the same. There have been many civilian deaths in Yemen due to the arms being provided by the US and UK. Lawmakers in the UK have proclaimed that the continued supply of arms to Saudi Arabia breaches several international humanitarian laws. However, even after extensive evidence of the damage the weapons are doing to civilians, the UK refuses to consider stopping the trade.

As distant and uninformed observers, we might see Syrian disarmament as an obvious and rational solution that prevents war. However, the option is placed on the table seconds before potential U.S. military involvement. In the case of Saddam Hussein, it took military involvement to prove his innocence in respect to chemical weapons. Why are dictators willing to threaten their positions of power when they can simply allow inspectors into the country? There must be some things that we don't understand. Power can often lead to narcissism and over confidence. Such traits could play a role in their unwillingness to cooperate.

The British are in favor of the non-violent solution to the situation in Iraq. They say that they are skeptical of the plan, but that they will take it seriously, and that it must be "'tested out properly' to ensure it [is] not a 'delaying tactic' or a 'ruse'."

This article is about John Kerry's diplomatic proposal to Syria to give up its chemical weapons in order to avoid US intervention. Russia, a close ally of Assad's regime, has supported Kerry's proposal and is discouraging Syria from using chemical weapons, if it will deter an American strike on Syria.

This is an important development, especially in the light of Putin's letter. Hopefully all of the countries will cooperate to make this non-violent solution a reality.

In order to remedy Ebola, Nations most affected by the virus, namely Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria and Sierra Leone, must allow their leaders to calm and heal the general public. If political and social leaders fail to eradicate the disease, the number of people infected will quickly rise from 3000 to 20,000. So far, several countries have mismanaged the outbreak. Governments quarantined rural and urban areas of aforementioned African countries; a slum in Monrovia, the Capitol of Liberia, was one of the blocked off places. Instead of helping the people, as intended, the quarantines trap people. These people feel disregarded and sentenced to death. Fear causes people to run from the spaces and further spread Ebola, defeating the purpose of the quarantine. Even if African governments take necessary steps to prevent the spread of the disease, Western aid is still essential. Western countries should not supply weapons to help contain quarantines, but rather provide medicine and experienced medical personnel. Unfortunately, the pay is not high enough for many medics to risk their lives treating a disease that is the highest risk to doctors and nurses. The solution to Ebola is not an obvious one; the entire process is experimental. However, U.N. experts say a medical center need be established in West Africa where representatives of every African country can convene to discuss the disease.

Very interesting article. It is interesting how psychology must be considered in giving aid to African countries infected with Ebola (for example, the article mentions that soldiers shouldn't brandish their weapons so Ebola patients won't be afraid of the quarantine). The quarantines seem like an extra cause for panic. Imagine a Liberian seeing a quarantine being set up. Do you think they would act calmly and happily admit themselves to the quarantine, or just simply run away and spread the virus further?

Great analysis--see quotes below--but my question is, can the widespread response that is needed actually be pulled together? Especially, can it be pulled together fast? "Most agreed on many basic principles. All, for example, were sure the outbreak could be stopped without experimental drugs or vaccines. None expected it to take less than six months." "Pay is also an issue, experts said. Health workers taking huge risks must be compensated, and so must their families if they die." "Also, this outbreak is like SARS in that doctors and nurses are in the highest risk group. Training must be extra-thorough - especially in taking off protective gear that might be smeared with virus. Nigeria, for example, does not let anyone near victims without three days of training on wearing protective gear, said its health minister, Dr. Onyebuchi Chukwu." "The new W.H.O. road map calls for 12,000 local health workers and 750 expatriates." ""There's no part of this you can't break down and make work," Dr. Aylward said. "But it took us 20 years to build the polio response, and this has to be done in 20 days."

After the US walked away from discussions on Syria, President Putin stepped up his country's military activity, with an enormous mobilization of first responders and civilians on the home front. In addition, the President redeployed nuclear weapons, making sure to leave some in place for American surveillance satellites to see. Mr. Putin also suggested the reopening of Russian military bases in Vietnam and Cuba. However, many see this as a distraction from the Russian economy, which is showing the first dip in income for the country's citizens since Putin assumed the Presidency in 2000. The nation's budget is also being heavily slashed, with healthcare and the military losing 33% and 6% of their funding, respectively. People inside Russia commented that the new budget leaves money for the military and police, and little else. Further speculation is that Mr. Putin is using the same strategy he employed in the Ukraine, which is to ramp up Russia's military and leverage that in diplomatic conversation with other nations. Some of Putin's comments also suggest that he wants to push Russia as a concern of the US Presidential election, and make sure that whoever the next President is will see Russia as a force to be reckoned with.

The rising tension between the U.S. and Iran, including threats of Nuclear weapons with "uranium enrichment far beyond levels ever reached in the country," makes me seriously question Trumps decisions to withdraw America from the nuclear deal and continue to test Iran's patience.

I wonder if in some way Iran progressing their nuclear technology is a good thing, as it requires the rest of the world to come up with a solution to the sanctions put on Iran and increases the stakes for Trump, who may realize that the sanctions are just causing more issues and could result in Iran creating nuclear weapons.

There will only be more and more debris in space in the future because no country will happily give-up their power or stop space exploration. Therefore, I wonder what kind of international policies we need to curb or regulate these experiments, and what technology we need to clean up space debris.

At the end of this article, links to "Better Understand the Russia-Ukraine War History: Here's what to know about Russia and Ukraine's relationship and the causes behind the conflict. On the Ground: Russian and Ukrainian forces are using a bevy of weapons as a deadly war of attrition grinds on in eastern Ukraine."

These nuclear "exchanges" between NATO and Russia are starting to seem much more like a Cold War #2.

Seems like Putin is getting very desperate, and a very real question as to whether he would take the bet on using the nuclear option in return for a chance at winning the war.

Given its potential implications for both Russia's advance into Ukraine and the safety of Russian land it seems hard to tell whether Putin is bluffing or not, but given his history the current situation is frightening.

This is interesting because even though the computers have changed so much it is fairly rare to see it used as a weapon. Apparently there have been lots of cyber attacks and counter attacks between the US and Iran and defense secretary Leon E. Panetta said that the US was at risk of a "Cyber Pearl Harbor". This raises the question of whether cyberspace could be a new front for warfare.

This article demonstrates the threat that cyberattacks pose to governments, economies, and even the people. Throughout middle school children like me we were warned of the seriousness of cyberbullying and how it could truly damage the feelings of others. However, the threats of a Cyber world war could be drastic to people all over the world. While there is no hard evidence that the latest attacks have been sanctioned by the Iranian government, the attacks have increased the disdain between Iran and the United States. In many ways the conflict does resemble bullying. Iran wants to prove that they have some power over the United states by attempting to damage our economy. They are using this entirely new medium of cyberspace to let out this aggression. The question is whether we are on the brink of a cyber war and what the consequences will be to the economy and freedom of information.