Why the U.S. refused to sign Chirac's preposition?

Question

why did the u.s., as well as india russia and china, refuse to adhere to french president jaques chirac's appeal to 46 countries to take up responsibility to reducing the amount of green-house gas emmisions they produce?

Mns. president chirac and government came up with the appeal after the un had warned of global warming shifting the climate, which would cause drought and disease, expand oceans, and displace costal populations. the national panel of scientists say that humans are in fact to blame.

background info tells us that these large countries are rich, and industrial, is economy a factor in their not consenting? i just think it looks rather bad. whats your opions?

*in the second paragraph, second line,
when i wrote 'un' i meant U.N. or the united nations

the last word is ' opinions'
my apologies

Answer 1

It would negatively affect the economy, and this would not be right considering that there is no proof that this is the cause of global warming.

Answer 2

1. Chirac was caught saying that the proposal was a way of leveling the economic playing field. That didn't play well.

2. India and China are only now going through their industrial revolutions while Russia is starting to tap their vast natural resources. They are not going to handicap themselves on behalf of an arrogant European from a highly developed and wealthy nation while many of their own citizens live in poverty.

3. Anything associated with the UN is a scam. Always. Letting the UN influence your economy or planet is like letting a pervert babysit your daughter.

4. It might be better to let the planet die than hand a victory to Chirac. He's a total creep. Really.

Answer 3

I did not get to the preposition but I really don't have to to know it will be in a language that will intentionally hurt the United States economy, slow or reverse the progress of countries like china and India which are trying to improve the quality of life for their people and most likely it still lets 3rd word and 2nd world countries use same technology(lack of) that would be banned in 1st world counties, for example fossil burning power plant (3rd world countries need no greenhouse gas filtering) in 1st world countries stop using any fossil burning power plant no matter what filter you use. Humans create carbon plants and trees need and thrive with carbon has trees in your yard triple its size over the last decade, point is global warming and cooling has been occurring since the dawn of time, the earth will regulate its self

Answer 4

Global warming is a myth made up by political hacks and is based on flawed science. Ask the people back east how warm it is under all that snow.
Did you know that the gas emitted by animals is 90% of the cause of "greenhouse" gas. So shall we plug up all the rear ends of the animals? If you do then let's start with the biggest gas producers known to man. The Liberal Elite.

Answer 5

I guess because the economic cost of moving everyone else in the world down to the third world status of France is real. Whereas the benefits of reducing greenhouse emissions are imaginary.

It should be kept in mind that economic cost are also human cost. As you lower the economic output of the world you reduce the food and shelter available and push more people below the poverty line. Starvation and death are the result of economic losses that cannot be ignored.

Answer 6

INdia and CHina is poluting 1/10th of what France is polluting per capita, so its unfair for them. US just wants to use this to gain economic grounds.

Answer 7

We intend to reduce greenhouse gasses. We don't have any particular desire to give other countries any say in HOW we do it.

Answer 8

PAYBACKS!!!!!!!!