Military Review

The US is in no hurry to destroy chemical weapons

51
The United States again pushed back the deadlines for the complete destruction of its chemical arsenal, leads RIA News the comment of the deputy head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey Ryabkov




It was at the insistence of the United States in the Chemical weapons (CWC) at the time was recorded unrealistically ambitious deadline for the global destruction of chemical weapons arsenals - up to 2007 year. It is clear that to achieve this goal failed. But more than a decade has passed. The absolute majority of countries - and we including - have nevertheless coped with their obligations,
says the commentary on the Paris meeting of the International Partnership to Combat Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons.

As the diplomat noted, “a completely different picture so far with the elimination of chemical weapons in the United States, which undoubtedly have all the necessary financial, industrial and scientific and technical resources to accomplish this task.”

However, despite this, it is irresponsible that time after time they postpone the deadlines for the complete destruction of their own chemical arsenal. Now it turns out that it is Washington that remains the owner of the world's largest stock of chemical weapons - more than 2,5, thousands of tons of the most dangerous weapons-grade chemical agents. Thus, the United States carefully retains the type of weapons of mass destruction that is prohibited for everyone else. Apparently, for some reason they need it,
stressed Ryabkov.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. NEXUS
    NEXUS 26 January 2018 09: 20 New
    12
    The US is in no hurry to destroy chemical weapons

    We are honest and have disposed of all chemical weapons. And cunning mattresses with their "dry disposal" decided to postpone this.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 26 January 2018 09: 30 New
        +6
        Quote: Chertt
        Even ahead of schedule, and mattresses are all poking around *****

        But the UN is very naturally able to shake test tubes.
        1. 210ox
          210ox 26 January 2018 10: 01 New
          +5
          How can he destroy this evil? Barmaley in white helmets have to shake with something ..
          Quote: NEXUS
          Quote: Chertt
          Even ahead of schedule, and mattresses are all poking around *****

          But the UN is very naturally able to shake test tubes.
      2. The black
        The black 26 January 2018 09: 30 New
        +6
        The US is in no hurry to destroy chemical weapons
        They are looking for some kind of terrorists to shove it, that they would invade another country, accusing the legitimate government.
        1. iliitchitch
          iliitchitch 26 January 2018 09: 43 New
          +3
          Quote: Black
          They are looking for some kind of terrorists to shove it, that they would invade another country, accusing the legitimate government.

          And, actually, where to go, invade? The habitat narrows irresistibly in vile coyotes. They drove themselves into zugzwang, everything, stagecoaches ended, there was no one to rob. It’s time for the supernova to collapse into a black hole, the fence is not only from Mexico, to build around the perimeter.
        2. PalBor
          PalBor 26 January 2018 10: 10 New
          +5
          Quote: Black
          The US is in no hurry to destroy chemical weapons
          They are looking for some kind of terrorists to shove it, that they would invade another country, accusing the legitimate government.

          Absolutely right. Of the non-nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the most insidious and therefore dangerous is biological. It is not for nothing that the Americans built so many laboratories around Russia, China and Iran.
          A chemical muck for provocations and political games.
          1. Bossota
            Bossota 26 January 2018 11: 05 New
            +5
            - Epidemics of rare diseases that have shocked Ukraine in recent years can be caused by commonplace leaks. However, this option seems extremely unlikely, given the high level of qualification of American specialists. Most likely, the infections were deliberate and were part of a test of modifications of military viruses in order to test them and improve them, ”the investigation said on the official website of the CyberBerkut hacker group.
            1. nikolaev
              nikolaev 26 January 2018 12: 17 New
              +1
              rather, water (in Nikolaev), bread, sugar, tea, and dairy are mixed with foodstuffs of mass demand in a directional way - something that is not subjected to heat treatment, or processing (pouring boiling water) does not destroy pathogens. Moreover, it can be one-time sabotage, and then the process goes naturally
      3. rocket757
        rocket757 26 January 2018 09: 36 New
        +4
        Suppose striped and weapons-grade plutonium (under a disposal agreement that) is being disposed of in a peculiar way !!! with the "sand" mixed and truncated ???
        We are all of these contracts, labeled prisoners, expensive in every sense to manage !!! I don’t feel like stuttering for the country's security.
        Anathema is marked by all - to betray the drunks and their hangers-on !!! or count, which is fairer, as in my opinion ???
    2. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 26 January 2018 14: 40 New
      +1
      We are honest and have disposed of all chemical weapons. And cunning mattresses with their "dry disposal" decided to postpone this. - NEXUS

      There is no such concept of "honesty" in politics! As a result of ill-conceived (and possibly criminal) actions regarding the premature destruction of chemical weapons not equal to the USA, Russia lost strategic parity with the USA.
      In fact, now, after all the destruction of chemical weapons in Russia, chemical weapons, along with nuclear ones, have become a strategic weapon of US superiority over Russia.
      In World War II, Hitler refused to use chemical weapons (Germany had enough of them), only because the USSR and England had the same weapons, saying that if only Germany would use chemical weapons at the front, the Allies would flood Germany poisonous substances.
      Russia's chemical weapons were a weapon to deter the United States from using it. Today, Russia itself has voluntarily deprived itself of this type of deterrence weapon.
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 26 January 2018 09: 23 New
    +4
    Here is a tool for pressing the US State Department on all platforms from the UN to PACE ... you can blame the USA for the same chemical attacks in SYRIA using this moment ... however, we play the ostentatious virtue with the wolves trying to read them moral about good and justice .
    1. TOPchymBA
      TOPchymBA 26 January 2018 09: 31 New
      +4
      Unfortunately for anyone in the leadership, the accusations against the “partners” are not needed.
      1. Lelek
        Lelek 26 January 2018 10: 31 New
        +2
        Quote: TOPchymBA
        at all venues from the UN to PACE.

        hi
        Unfortunately, this is not our or even neutral platform. Our vote there is practically one against all. Trumpet of course you need, but the result will certainly be zero. That's when some “barmaley” (God forbid) undermine the chemical charge in “Europe” or “America”, then maybe something will reach the western burghers (if in this case they do not blame the ubiquitous Russia). yes
  3. AVA77
    AVA77 26 January 2018 09: 23 New
    +2
    Apparently it’s time for us to recommence production of OM as an incentive for amers.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 26 January 2018 09: 34 New
      +7
      Quote: AVA77
      Apparently it’s time for us to recommence production of OM as an incentive for amers.

      Why? Storage is expensive and dangerous ... But torpedoes with a nuclear charge and cobalt filling very sober the mattress heads.
      1. AVA77
        AVA77 26 January 2018 10: 07 New
        0
        Why, just in case, why did the Amers, the Yankees did not destroy 2'5 thousand tons, in terms of life, how much will it be?
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 26 January 2018 10: 08 New
          +3
          Quote: AVA77
          in terms of life, how much will it be?

          Everything living on land, except for viruses and bacteria.
    2. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 26 January 2018 09: 36 New
      +3
      It is necessary at the UN to declare the same thing with regard to the USA that they also argued against Assad. But we have evidence, in contrast, not a test tube but tons.
      1. nikolaev
        nikolaev 26 January 2018 12: 08 New
        0
        but you need to bring a test tube with you to a meeting at the UN! And be sure to shake the audience at the most heartbreaking moment
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 26 January 2018 12: 16 New
          +1
          Directly imagined a silent scene, Nebenzya dressed in OZK:
          - We didn’t find WMD at Saddam, we found him in the USA.
          And ... uncorks the tube ...
  4. Maz
    Maz 26 January 2018 09: 24 New
    +2
    We have state reserve warehouses, which is not there
    1. Pax tecum
      Pax tecum 26 January 2018 09: 27 New
      +3
      Yes, I want to believe that we still keep the most effective chemical weapons. Well, not so simple we are.
      1. Vard
        Vard 26 January 2018 09: 29 New
        +1
        If something ... that is, Chapaevsk ... chemical fertilizer plant ...
      2. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 26 January 2018 09: 39 New
        +1
        Stew 1972 ... and in fact, with the current taste can not be compared.
    2. Same lech
      Same lech 26 January 2018 09: 29 New
      +1
      We have state reserve warehouses, which is not there


      And there is also a law on state secrets ... smile lean against the wall my friend against the wall ...
  5. astepanov
    astepanov 26 January 2018 09: 31 New
    +2
    In connection with the topic of the article, the question arises: why, in a state of post-perestroika poverty, after the devastation associated with the activities of the Yeltsin-Gaidar-Chubais - and other camarilla, Russia hastily rushed to destroy its arsenals, spending enormous money on this? And I would like to remind you: rockets were also blown up under treaties with the States on restrictions, they also unloaded and sold weapons-grade uranium to mattresses for nothing - while they only dismantled their rockets into blocks, and the uranium was stored from warheads (however, according to the latter paragraph, I may be mistaken). Summary: the rush is needed when catching fleas.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 26 January 2018 11: 47 New
      0
      Destruction paid in the USA
      1. thinker
        thinker 26 January 2018 14: 36 New
        0
        Not only the USA.
        In the early 2000s, the USA, Canada, Germany, Italy, Great Britain and the Netherlands helped finance an expensive recycling program in Moscow.
        According to RIA Novosti, Washington intends to get rid of banned substances by the end of 2023. Ammunition to be disposed of is now stored in warehouses in Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky.

        https://russian.rt.com/world/article/434624-ssha-
        rossiya-himicheskoe-orujie
  6. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 26 January 2018 09: 31 New
    +2
    But does not your dear colleagues remind you that all the last "vysyers" of the US representative in the UN, well, just like the behavior of a market thief who is caught and who shouts loudest at the same time; "... hold the thief ..."! And why are our diplomats silent about the fact that the chemical weapons in Syria are used by the United States extortion and which the United States most likely supplies them, because the United States has not fulfilled its obligations to destroy the chemical. weapons, unlike Russia and the same Syria !?
  7. Square
    Square 26 January 2018 09: 31 New
    +1
    Why rush so to speak
    Hurry is good only when catching fleas
    No one needs to rush
  8. Egorovich
    Egorovich 26 January 2018 09: 32 New
    +4
    Mattress-makers will use their stored OM for arming terrorists around the world. They do this with success, they have a great experience.
  9. AVA77
    AVA77 26 January 2018 09: 33 New
    0
    If they have problems with the destruction of the islands, I think that Russia could help them in this, for the appropriate money
  10. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 26 January 2018 09: 34 New
    +4
    Washington remains the owner of the world's largest stockpile of chemical weapons - more than 2,5 thousand tons
    What is obvious and sought. Loudly urging everyone to destroy, they modestly watched from the side how others do it. Today, the loudest scream about the use of chemical weapons in Syria by Assad with the assistance of Russia. The meanest country.
  11. Star
    Star 26 January 2018 09: 35 New
    +2
    Why should they disarm?
    Their military budget speaks for itself.
  12. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 26 January 2018 09: 35 New
    +1
    Mattresses are not used to destroying their hands. Itching to sell to someone.
  13. Simon
    Simon 26 January 2018 09: 39 New
    +2
    Quote: Maz
    We have state reserve warehouses, which is not there

    But the chemical weapons are definitely not there. Our back in the 90s betrayed all chemical weapons for disposal, according to the contract. We have enough of the usual modern weapons - Syria, it showed. Yes, and we are not going to attack anyone request
  14. NKVD
    NKVD 26 January 2018 09: 46 New
    0
    But this is understandable from the time of the Vietnam War that the United States is a swindler, and our sheep-democrats run in front of the herd.
  15. Hariton laptev
    Hariton laptev 26 January 2018 09: 48 New
    +3
    I must say even more, they not only carefully store, they use it for its intended purpose without hesitation. America is like a mad dog that runs with bulging eyes and bites everyone who gets in the way. Well, for the time being, sooner or later they will shoot you.
  16. bald
    bald 26 January 2018 09: 55 New
    +2
    And what, it is impossible to voice this at the UN Assembly, so that all participants hear - how much, what and where is stored (most of this data, we know for sure). And it doesn't matter that the UN is corrupt - just go ahead and voice it.
  17. pvv113
    pvv113 26 January 2018 10: 09 New
    +5
    it is Washington that remains the owner of the world's largest stockpile of chemical weapons
    [Quote] [/ quote]
    So that there are no questions about where the Basmachi have chemical weapons from in Syria
    1. bald
      bald 26 January 2018 17: 50 New
      +1
      At the site of the liberated region from terrorists, in the settlements of Al-Sayal, Hasrat and Al-Jal, Israeli-made mines, toxic substances, weapons and ammunition were found. This is just one example, and a fresh one.
      1. pvv113
        pvv113 26 January 2018 18: 35 New
        +1
        Talks about ISIS cooperation with Israel have been going on for a long time. Only for some reason this has not yet been officially announced. There are only facts of strikes against the Syrian army, which were beneficial only to the Basmachs. Well, Israeli weapons
        1. bald
          bald 26 January 2018 20: 27 New
          +1
          Yes, everyone except Russia is silent - who is bought, who is interested, who is afraid, and who has enough of their own problems and do not care about others. Fuck them all to hell, Russia is no stranger to such an attitude towards it, as they say, we will break through.
          1. pvv113
            pvv113 26 January 2018 20: 56 New
            +1
            Indeed, there have been worse times wink
  18. Dormidont
    Dormidont 26 January 2018 10: 12 New
    +1
    Our Western and Middle Eastern partners, as always, made us like suckers
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 26 January 2018 10: 25 New
      +1
      Quote: Dormidont
      Our Western and Middle Eastern partners, as always, made us like suckers

      Sympathize with you.
  19. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 26 January 2018 10: 27 New
    +1
    They just dispose of chemical weapons through intermediaries in Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan and other countries of the world. Cheap and no overhead.
  20. Cat Marquis
    Cat Marquis 26 January 2018 10: 40 New
    +3
    And someone very "smart" has already destroyed their chemical weapons and even reported "that ahead of time." He reported in the hope that they would "pat him on the head" for this, but he was not even "patted" ..... They only said, "why" stroke ", for our money he was destroyed .. .. "And the Yankes, and other" Europeans "cherish their chemical weapons ...
  21. prior
    prior 26 January 2018 11: 00 New
    +1
    So that's whose chemical weapons terrorists are using in Syria! That's where Powell's test tubes come from!
  22. Vadmir
    Vadmir 26 January 2018 11: 46 New
    +2
    There are situations when you should not rush and this is the very case. So Russia hastened, reported on the complete elimination of chemical weapons, but what is the result? As a result, it gave a potential enemy a military advantage. as motorists say: "do not rush, otherwise you will have time."
  23. nikolaev
    nikolaev 26 January 2018 12: 02 New
    +2
    how will the FSA give up chemical weapons? - they are also a monument to chemical weapons and genocide with its use in Vietnam, Latin America, Yugoslavia, Syria!
  24. Sige
    Sige 27 January 2018 09: 17 New
    0
    The United States cannot rush to destroy chemical weapons.
    If they rush to destroy chemical weapons, then they will have nothing to supply the Syrian peaceful opposition.