Which countries did not support the initiative of Russia to completely abandon the placement of weapons in space

The Russian Federation, in collaboration with 26 countries, prepared a draft resolution on the inadmissibility of placing in outer space any weapons. The project is considered at the UN General Assembly. However, already at the stage of preliminary consideration of the draft anti-militarist initiative of the Russian Federation, such an initiative was identified as a clear opponent. This is the United States of America. How unexpected...


Which countries did not support the initiative of Russia to completely abandon the placement of weapons in space


The American delegation voted against the adoption of the draft resolution in the so-called First Committee of the UN General Assembly, declaring that "the states do not yet have an understanding of what should be called a weapon in outer space." Apparently, there is no “understanding” exclusively on the American side, since the draft resolution clearly states that we are talking about any type of weapons based in space.

The delegation of the United States states that in subsequent reviews the resolution will abandon its support. The argument is already the next (quote RIA News):
The initiative involves only weapons that are based in space, and does not speak of ground-based anti-satellite weapons, which can aggravate, rather than reduce, distrust and possible miscalculations.


At the end of the material, it is worthwhile to submit a list of those states that, even on an anti-militarist initiative, are not capable of expressing their opinions and are forced to vote as the Washington hosts tell them. This is about Ukraine and Georgia, who spoke out against the draft resolution. It is noteworthy that voted against and Israel. Seven delegations abstained.

122 states have supported the initiative of the Russian Federation. Is it time for the Russian Foreign Ministry to make a statement that the United States and several other states are isolated from the rest of the world community ...
Photos used:
http://www.un.org
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. oleg-gr 5 November 2015 10: 08 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Exceptional argumentation. About distrust and miscalculations - so a completely brilliant discovery.
    1. _Vladislav_ 5 November 2015 10: 42 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Quote: oleg-gr
      Exceptional argumentation. About distrust and miscalculations - so a completely brilliant discovery.


      It is useless to contain these processes. I think that both Russia and the USA have decided everything for themselves for a long time (about the placement of weapons in space). The only question is the degree of readiness of each of the parties and an attempt to gain time.

      It's like a nuclear weapon - the world will never give it up until it comes up with something else. Something more practical or destructive.

      So is the satellite weapon. It will be - this is progress. And he cannot be stopped.
      1. Ahmed 5 November 2015 20: 59 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: _Vladislav_
        It is useless to contain these processes ...


        That's right! fellow Give the "Death Star" on the low reference! soldier
        1. Weyland 6 November 2015 01: 01 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Something you have mixed up ... in Star Wars, there was Emperor PalPutin and his subordinate dark lord Darth MedVeidar. laughing
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Skif83 5 November 2015 14: 48 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The argument is typical in their spirit: -
      states do not yet have an understanding of what should be called weapons in outer space

      They have a gradation of weapons for different mortality (laughing) ...
      And we don’t need it, we need what the frames will be afraid of!
  2. JIaIIoTb 5 November 2015 10: 09 New
    • 19
    • 0
    +19
    And then they will be surprised how Russia quickly deployed a combat force in space so quickly. At the same time, completely forgetting that it was Russia that proposed not to allow these weapons into space. And there it turned out precisely because of the United States.
    1. hydrox 5 November 2015 10: 15 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: JIaIIoTb
      And there it turned out to be precisely because of the United States.


      The weak-minded Yankees do not understand that this gives Russia an advantage, since our active devices are already hosted near the Amer’s intelligence satellites and at any moment they can deal with them like Boch with a turtle ...
      1. Lelek 5 November 2015 10: 30 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: hydrox
        like boch with a turtle ...


        You probably meant "like BUK! With tiles"?
        And about “active devices” didn’t you whisper to Shoigu? bully
        1. veksha50 5 November 2015 10: 51 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Lelek
          And about “active devices” didn’t you whisper to Shoigu?



          In matters of space and anti-satellite weapons, we, the USSR, were far ahead of the Americans at the end of the 80s ... I hope that not all achievements have been sold, plundered and forgotten ...

          And now there is at least one Russian satellite that “visits guests in the mornings”, sometimes approaching some US spacecraft ... It seems to me that these “walks” of our satellite unobtrusively warn Americans about the capabilities of our VKS ...

          PS It’s not a secret for anyone that the most important task in the event (God forbid !!!) of unleashing large-scale hostilities will be to disable (destroy) the enemy’s space group ...
      2. Bayonet 5 November 2015 12: 18 New
        • -2
        • 0
        -2
        Quote: hydrox
        since our active devices are already hosted near the Amer reconnaissance satellites and at any moment can do with them, like Boch with a turtle ...

        A kind of large remotely controlled hats that "reign supremely close ..." and ready to swipe everyone to hell on the first order !!! Passion for games with space wars does not pass in vain! Well, "Boch" to help you! wink
        1. veksha50 5 November 2015 12: 22 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Bayonet
          Passion for games with space wars does not pass in vain!



          Unfortunately, already at the end of the twentieth century, IT was far from games ...

          PS And Buran was far from being developed for peaceful purposes ... And about ... they spoiled it, now it is unlikely to be restored, although there are talks about attempts to resume this program ... That's it - conversations ... Because Buran without Energy is nothing ... But there is no Energy either ... And whether Sarmat will be able to replace it in terms of power - so hardly ...
          1. Bayonet 5 November 2015 13: 08 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: veksha50

            Unfortunately, already at the end of the twentieth century, IT was far from games ...

            This is all understandable, all the more ridiculous are the hat-making shouts of the idiots about the undivided rule of our maneuvering satellites. There is no end to work!
            Quote: veksha50
            And whether Sarmat will be able to replace it by power - so it is unlikely ...

            I agree. But to launch anti-satellite or even shock, heavy missiles (such as "Energy") are not needed. These are necessary for breeding large stations.
            1. veksha50 5 November 2015 14: 25 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Bayonet
              But to launch anti-satellite or even shock, heavy missiles (such as "Energy") are not needed.



              I had in mind the launch into orbit of the new Buran, whose program is being resumed on the sidelines ...

              PS The possibility of reviving it is also in doubt ... People, technologies, documentation ... Well, the documentation most likely should be preserved ... but the rest ???
              1. Bayonet 5 November 2015 15: 00 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: veksha50
                . Well, the documentation is likely to be preserved ... but the rest ???

                Sure! The program involved hundreds of enterprises, and this is equipment, technology and much more. It’s not easy to restore all this, and it’s unlikely that it will work out - much has been destroyed or even remained abroad. The past decades have also not been in vain, science has stepped forward, a lot of new things have appeared, so we need to make a new medium, just do it, not chatter!
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Bayonet 5 November 2015 13: 11 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Bayonet
          Well, "Boch" to help you!

          I did not expect another reaction from the idiots! Set cons - do not think with your head! There is not enough knowledge for another. hi
    2. Tor5
      Tor5 5 November 2015 10: 18 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      A very likely outcome. I do not rule out that the Shtatovs have already swelled an incredible amount of funds on this topic (weapons in space) and therefore do not want to abandon it. Therefore, the argument is rather far-fetched.
      1. hydrox 5 November 2015 10: 22 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Tor5
        Therefore, the argument is rather far-fetched.


        That's right :: the Yankees are going to compete with us in space (fight!). Let's see how they succeed if even now our units sniffed them to the bolt.
        1. sabakina 5 November 2015 10: 34 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Our battle station "Almaz" seems to be on conservation ...
        2. quote 5 November 2015 11: 18 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          Quote: hydrox
          Quote: Tor5
          Therefore, the argument is rather far-fetched.


          That's right :: the Yankees are going to compete with us in space (fight!). Let's see how they succeed if even now our units sniffed them to the bolt.

          Question: What? Question to you. What have they created over the past 15 years? (Period, satellite lifetime?) Secret? I think not.
          All this is like an American scam: we don’t agree! We have great interest and opportunities, we have even advanced far! (In fact, we are in shit) BUT! You are afraid, tremble and invest in development! (Strain on finances). Race type weapons !!!
          Thanks for the "good"! We will develop!
          1. Bayonet 5 November 2015 12: 32 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: devis
            What have they created over the past 15 years?

            Well, for example, X – 37V. Or is it so - halam balam? What is known about his mission and capabilities? There may be enough hatred, but is it worth talking seriously?
            1. fazayek 5 November 2015 13: 05 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Yes, there is less and less objective people. They really believe that our space industry is more developed than that of amers
      2. udincev 5 November 2015 10: 40 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Tor5
        I do not rule out that the Shtatovs have already swelled an incredible amount of funds on this topic (weapons in space) and therefore do not want to abandon it.

        ... and Georgia and Ukraine are planning to deploy their weapons in space.
        And how can they vote for non-placement ?!
    3. oblako 5 November 2015 11: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, we kind of wanted the best ... Now do not be offended ...
  3. Andryukha 5 November 2015 10: 09 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    It seems ours decided to show how bad it is to have weapons in orbit:
    They offered Peace to the world, the world community refused, so what if we can, then we bring out good green satellites.
    Not for nothing we have the videoconferencing.
    1. NordUral 5 November 2015 10: 12 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      This will be a logical conclusion from the voting results. A little bit later.
  4. vovanpain 5 November 2015 10: 10 New
    • 21
    • 0
    +21
    As soon as I read the headline I already realized that it was the USA, I read the news and there are exceptional mattresses as hypocrites.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. YGV-97219 5 November 2015 10: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    These goat husbands are probably developing something of this kind and therefore vote against!
    1. hydrox 5 November 2015 10: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Weapons - such a thing :: always has been and always will be - weapons must be superior to the enemy, and the Americans even buy rocket engines from us!
      And how did they gather their satellites into orbit?
      Minutemen, or what?
  6. hydrox 5 November 2015 10: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    States have already found excuses, albeit weak and funny, but allowing them not to sign a UN resolution
    They regret that there is no ISIS in space that could be fought until the end of time (as the Yankees do in Iraq and Afghanistan).
  7. Maksus 5 November 2015 10: 12 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    But hadn't the treaties on the demilitarization of outer space been adopted even during the Cold War? Since the Yankees do not fit right now, they already have something to do in their orbit.
  8. Dezinto 5 November 2015 10: 13 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Again?

    Star Wars?

    1. brasist 5 November 2015 10: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And how can it be here without the main cosmos of Georgia and Ukraine, on the earth by the scuffle, so maybe they won’t get it in space and most importantly they will be launched from the slingshots?
      1. brasist 5 November 2015 10: 47 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        probably so
  9. Militia 5 November 2015 10: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    announcing that “states do not yet have an understanding of what should be called weapons in outer space”

    As it comes to business, they immediately become dull. Can the General Assembly and Russia put the question to a vote on the exclusion of the dull from the voting list. Maybe concepts will appear right away?
  10. udincev 5 November 2015 10: 16 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    122 states have supported the initiative of the Russian Federation. Is it time for the Russian Foreign Ministry to make a statement that the United States and several other states are isolated from the rest of the world community ...
    Judging by similar US claims, it's time
  11. Corsair0304 5 November 2015 10: 18 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Who would doubt it. Of course, great 3,14 Dosia with her mongrels will be against any peace initiative - otherwise how can one remain a world hegemon? Only missiles in geostationary orbit and other measures of general democratization.
    Yes, on the other hand - a bolt on them. Mattresses even those contracts that are signed do not comply. And so it will be at least something to rely on.
    “The Biological Weapons Convention (BW) is another potential tool to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The BW Convention, ratified by the United States in 1975, prohibits the countries parties to this treaty from developing, acquiring, or storing biological or toxic substances if they are not required for self-defense or peaceful purposes, while the U.S. biological protection program appears to be above the level allowed by the Convention.The U.S. secretly constructed a bio-bomb model and produced anthrax virus for military purposes as part of its biological protection program. It can be argued that although the declared goals are defense, these actions violate the BO Convention because the Convention prohibits the production of weapons. These and other biological protection measures were secretly carried out and, therefore, the US partners in this agreement could not evaluate them for match the latter. "
    1. LVMI1980 5 November 2015 10: 34 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      This picture is taken from the book of the 80s "where the threat to peace comes from"
      true facts if taken to the letter
  12. Abakan 5 November 2015 10: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Isn't it time for the Russian Foreign Ministry to make a statement that the USA and several other states are isolated from the rest of the world community ... not to isolate but to bang them all)) a joke of course, but such thoughts have recently come to me
  13. Wedmak 5 November 2015 10: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If all countries accept this rule as law, but the USA, Ukraine and Georgia do not accept, then what will we do? Okay, Ukraine and Georgia, the first one collapsed its path into space, the second one didn’t have it. But what if the United States launches some sort of armed device? What actions will be on our part?
    Another question is what is armed. Current technology allows you to bring anything you want, from cannons against satellites to warheads with thermonuclear filling. I am generally silent about lasers, as if the ideal option.
    And the chances that the US will voluntarily limit its deployment of armaments are nil.
    1. victorsh 5 November 2015 10: 36 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      With the exception of the Yankees, the rest of the countries are GREAT SPACE HOLDERS. They probably launch their spaceships a few pieces a year. One word is CRAFTS !!!
    2. arane 5 November 2015 11: 57 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Wedmak
      If all countries accept this rule as law, but the USA, Ukraine and Georgia do not accept, then what will we do? Okay, Ukraine and Georgia, the first one collapsed its path into space, the second one didn’t have it. But what if the United States launches some sort of armed device? What actions will be on our part?
      Another question is what is armed. Current technology allows you to bring anything you want, from cannons against satellites to warheads with thermonuclear filling. I am generally silent about lasers, as if the ideal option.
      And the chances that the US will voluntarily limit its deployment of armaments are nil.

      How to do what? Militarize the cosmos! We wanted a peaceful space, they refused! Basically, I think this initiative was intended to show who is who, no more. Our well-known that the Americans will talk!
  14. russmensch 5 November 2015 10: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    the draft resolution clearly states that we are talking about any types of weapons based in space.

    And Americans out of habit (??) change the mind and believe that:
    Initiative implies only weapons that are based in space and do not talk about ground-based anti-satellite weapons, which can aggravate, and not reduce, distrust and possible miscalculations.

    Does nobody understand anything, or is everyone crazy? fool
  15. VseDoFeNi 5 November 2015 10: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    in the so-called First Committee of the UN General Assembly, announcing that "states do not yet have an understanding of what should be called weapons in outer space."


    These, gentlemen clowns, are not boxes in the AK-74 and M-16. All of you perfectly understand.
    But anti-satellite missiles to destroy the GPS constellation, in case we need to stock up. smile
  16. ML-334 5 November 2015 10: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Okay, the Jews are asking for money from the United States for armament, and why the hell is it coming from?
  17. zadorin1974 5 November 2015 10: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Under the agreement, the Americans must provide information to Russia about the cargo (satellites) put into orbit using our engines (using Russian engines is prohibited for military purposes). This raises the question: they stopped working with Yuzhmash (and the plant has already been killed, we’ve been killed not a ride, their developments are only in the distant future, they again want the loot to milk on the F-35 from Congress, and fly into space on a trampoline?
  18. veksha50 5 November 2015 10: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Speech about Ukraine and Georgiaopposed to the draft resolution "...

    Mdaaaa ... Two great cosmic powers - against ...

    But in general, the US resistance only confirms my long-standing conjecture that their aggressive plans for space have long received great attention ...

    And all these agreements, as we see, are concluded mainly so that one of the parties "throws" the other ... Even if the United States signs this agreement, it will not give absolutely any guarantee that they will fulfill this agreement .. .
  19. am808s 5 November 2015 10: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It’s just that the mattresses are already dreaming of space revenge. They are already preparing weapons and we will give them engines and then they will hang over the whole planet blackmailing everyone with their terrible space weapons. - A ton of nails to meet you!
  20. roskot 5 November 2015 10: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There are few wars on earth, give space. Fly on our engines and crap around the world. And in the allies are two space powers - Ukraine and Georgia.
  21. rotmistr60 5 November 2015 10: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It is noteworthy that Israel voted against

    There is just nothing remarkable there. The clear principle is "You are me, I am you." And the guys, under the white-blue flag, on the site constantly prove that they are independent, independent of anyone and can pile on anyone they want. The second significant vote at the UN for the week and the result is the same with the same countries.
  22. tolmachiev51 5 November 2015 10: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Nothing new !!! Whatever Russia does or proposes is "everything is wrong or bad." Well, Georgia and dill are super space powers.
  23. Stas157 5 November 2015 11: 06 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    I suppose that we have serious achievements in terms of space weapons (among Americans too). So, in order to get ahead of the Americans and legally begin practical implementation, Russia took the initiative to ban space weapons (like this in Putin's style)! It is logical to assume that the United States, of course, will not abandon its development, which in general has happened! And now Russia has all the trump cards in its hands! We were the first to prohibit weapons in space, we were refused! Now forward, with a clear conscience! And let only someone pickle, after that, that Russia has militarized the whole cosmos! ... And the Americans will again be foolish))
  24. givigor71 5 November 2015 11: 34 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    without words...
    1. Petr1 5 November 2015 12: 59 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Any superpower will fall apart sooner or later, the USA will be the same, and the USA will not, and there will be no country like Israel, their Arabs will tear and tear their hands. That’s what they are doing. Well, on the outskirts and in Georgia, the treacherous regimes must also be recognized not eternal.
      1. Lee_Mubai 5 November 2015 20: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Israel in general has become like the Nazis 2worldly, in full throat with anyway the slightest case yelling about the genocide of the Jews in World War II, and what are they doing now? Palestinians are bombed without knowing who is to blame and who is not !!!!
    2. Lee_Mubai 5 November 2015 19: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I completely agree with you, only the complete destruction of Osh will give us all peace and prosperity throughout the world !!!!!! soldier
  25. I doubt it 5 November 2015 11: 36 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    What is the point of proposing another agreement if today the agreements have no practical value? Anyone can refuse, withdraw unilaterally, not fulfill or partially fulfill. Accept and not ratify for 20 years, finally. If your opponent is only looking for loopholes in any of your contracts. So why make another one with him? Why bother with him about anything? Will it stop him?
    Moreover, they already have achievements. And not just the operating time, but the devices that are called "in the metal", flying. And they won’t conclude any agreements with us until something similar, and even better, superior, appears with us.
  26. Tjeck 5 November 2015 12: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Hmm, certainly space is the first thing that comes to mind at the mention of Georgia .. fool
  27. Rokossovsky 5 November 2015 12: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Bayonet
    Quote: hydrox
    since our active devices are already hosted near the Amer reconnaissance satellites and at any moment can do with them, like Boch with a turtle ...

    A kind of large remotely controlled hats that "reign supremely close ..." and ready to swipe everyone to hell on the first order !!! Passion for games with space wars does not pass in vain! Well, "Boch" to help you! wink

    Dear Alexander! Fat minus you for
    Boh

    Doesn't paint this person
  28. GRIG 5 November 2015 12: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    No matter how strange it may look, but this initiative, in my opinion, is aimed at a fair demonization of the State Department’s policy. Rather, to its documentary confirmation "in front of everyone", at the highest world institute, at the UN.
    Reluctance to join peace initiatives, lack of maturity, babble in excuses, gross interventions in the affairs of sovereign states ... all this must be "accumulated and formed," discussed and condemned.
    About the same thing now with Syria. Russia has proposed joining a just cause. What is the answer? Snot, nagging, thimbles, fakes, cynical slander, etc.
    “You need to call a spade a spade,” it seems our guarantor said not so long ago.
    And you need to do it the world norm.

    Well, the "great space powers", such as Bandera and Georgia, well, any Sherkhan (from Mowgli) always has his own "personal" jackals.
    1. Rokossovsky 5 November 2015 13: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      this initiative, in my opinion, is aimed at a fair demonization of the State Department’s policy. Rather, to its documentary confirmation "in front of everyone", at the highest world institute, at the UN.
      Reluctance to join peace initiatives, lack of maturity, babble in "excuses", flagrant interventions in the affairs of sovereign states

      So they can say the same about us!
      We are allegedly also invited to participate in "peace initiatives" - the overthrow of the "blood-dictatorial" Assad regime in Syria! But we are still against the whole "progressive" world community!
      Inconsistency is from the same song as “peace initiatives,” see above. Why, we also indulge in the right veto, in their opinion, too often!
      There is no point in talking about gross interventions in the affairs of sovereign states! Well, we are occupying half of Ukraine for the second year! In small, proud and very sovereign Georgia, we are ugly with 2008! We don’t let Moldovans arrange complete destruction ... reunion of Transnistria! We are terrible savages and aggressors!
      So there is nothing to be surprised at. Each has its own truth. hi
      1. GRIG 5 November 2015 15: 51 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Rokossovsky
        So they can say the same about us!

        Not "can say," but they say.
        And for many years.
        And now "they" have to listen to the truth about themselves. The truth with evidence.
        The truth showing who is who.
        Quote: Rokossovsky
        Everyone has their own truth.

        "True, always alone." This said the pharaoh.
  29. fazayek 5 November 2015 13: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And why should the state-leader in the space sector refuse to develop weapons for this environment? They did the right thing, they understand that VPK is driving progress very much. And we do not need to give up weapons in space. I would also understand if all sorts of undeveloped countries would ache, but we, why? What do we want to completely abandon the space industry?
  30. bad
    bad 5 November 2015 13: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    [quote] [The American delegation voted against the adoption of the draft resolution in the so-called First Committee of the UN General Assembly, declaring that "states do not yet have an understanding of what should be called weapons in outer space." Apparently, the “American side” does not have “understanding”, as the draft resolution clearly indicates that we are talking about any types of weapons based in space. / Quote] ...- in the end, if it comes to weapons in space it will be worse for them .. then the first will complain that it is necessary to sign some kind of agreement on some kind of restriction ... because while they think, we are doing ... that's the whole story ..
  31. Old26 5 November 2015 23: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Article (more precisely, note) - MINUS. Note NOTHING. What kind of resolution, what types of weapons, when passed - nothing. And to conclude from nothing is stupid.

    Quote: sabakina
    Our battle station "Almaz" seems to be on conservation ...

    In the museum? Yes. In reality, no, for a very long time

    Quote: veksha50
    And whether Sarmat will be able to replace it by power - so it is unlikely ...

    He won’t even stand close.

    Quote: Bayonet
    Another reaction from the idiots and did not expect

    Spit. Correctly said - minus - do not think

    Quote: Militia
    As it comes to business, they immediately become dull. Can the General Assembly and Russia put the question to a vote on the exclusion of the dull from the voting list. Maybe concepts will appear right away?


    And the question, by the way, is posed by the Americans correctly.

    • What are weapons in space?
    • Anti-satellite system - weapons or not?
    • And relatively speaking, the explosive charge to eliminate, if necessary, a satellite - is it a weapon or not?
    • Why will a satellite interceptor in orbit be considered a weapon, and there isn’t exactly the same on the launch pad in hourly readiness?
    • Laser in orbit - weapon or not?
    • Is a gun or space-to-space rockets a weapon?
    • Is a ground-based anti-satellite interceptor missile a weapon?

    We must really first decide what to consider weapons and what not, and then negotiate. Judging by the quantity, all African countries, Asian countries and the majority of those who never launched themselves voted for our proposal.