It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
Your argument assumes that all countries are equal - and crass though it may be, they simply aren't. In the same way that I would make a distinction between a law abiding person and a criminal in deciding who should get a gun, so must the same distinctions be made between countries. If Japan got a nuke it would be regrettable, but no big deal. If North Korea gets a nuke it's a very big deal. This is not because of race or prejudice. What's different between the two is that one is aggressive, does not value human rights, violates international agreements, etc. - in short, Japan can be trusted with a nuke, but North Korea can't. I think this is obvious to just about anyone.
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
You're making assumptions about my views based on facts not in evidence. This is a result of your own bias, not mine. Are you advocating that all criminals be given guns?
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
Non-proliferation means to not spread them around.
Main Entry: pro·lif·er·ate
Pronunciation: pr&-'li-f&-"rAt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
Etymology: back-formation from proliferation, from French prolifération, from proliférer to proliferate, from prolifère reproducing freely, from Latin proles + -fer -ferous
intransitive senses
1 : to grow by rapid production of new parts, cells, buds, or offspring
2 : to increase in number as if by proliferating : MULTIPLY
transitive senses : to cause to grow by proliferating
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
Your assertion that the US has not significantly reduced it's nuclear arsenal (which DOES take time) is bogus.
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
What are you going to do about countries that sign the NPT but STILL develop nukes - as North Korea has already done? Many countries have continued to develop nuclear capabilities even after signing the NPT.
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
What you're suggesting is that we eliminate all OUR nukes but allow rogue nations to continue developing them. I see no result from that except a bloodier and more deadly world. And even perhaps a dictator like Hitler managing to wrest control of the world.
Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
The Iranians have a simple solution to remove our 'attentions' - they can STOP attempting to develop nuclear weapons, which they've ALREADY promised to do!
Crass and my point entirely. How can you judge another country without expressing bias? Is the fact that a country doesnt like your country enough reason to deny them nuclear weapons?
The United States is the only country to have used nuclear weapons against another country. Is that the measure of a responsible country with nuclear weapons? I dont want to open the WW2 can of worms so I'd appreciate if you could stick to the nukes use in WW2 rather than the surrounding WW2 themes if you can, in the interest of topical relevance.
This weapon is to be used against Japan between now and August 10th. I have told the Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new.
He and I are in accord. The target will be a purely military one and we will issue a warning statement asking the Japs to surrender and save lives. I'm sure they will not do that, but we will have given them the chance. It is certainly a good thing for the world that Hitler's crowd or Stalin's did not discover this atomic bomb. It seems to be the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be made the most useful...
I dont understand where your draw that conclusion from. Im a staunch anti-gun proponent so you've kinda missed the mark there
I've read the NPT on many occasions and the trade off for these countries that forgo their sovereign right to nuclear weapons is that the nuclear-armed ones give up all of theirs. The definition of 'proliferation' is not the limitation of the NPT.
The whole inclusion of the "disarm" clause for nuke-countries was THE incentive for others not to go nuclear. Otherwise why would they give up their right to defend themselves with the epitome of the deterant weapon?
If they had developed any nukes whilst bound by the NPT then all the evidence proving such activity should be brought to the worlds attention. The UN security council show be showed all the information and retaliatory action should be mandated. Merely accusing, with no proof (ala Iran) that a country is developing nuclear weapons is not enough. Its also not enough to justify breaking your own NPT commitments by furthering the arms race.
If the United States systematically dismantled its nuclear arsenal with every other nuclear power reciprocating at every stage it would be possible. Every NPT nuke-country could beleft with a single nuclear weapon as a security blanket until a non-aggression treaty could be signed by all the nuclear powers. At this stage the North Koreans, Indians and Pakistanis should be brought before the UNSC to remove their nukes in response to Britains, USAs, Russiass, Chinas and Frances removal of all but 1 nuclear weapon. The North Koreans, Indians and Pakistanis should be made to sign a non-aggression pact with the NPT nuke-powers and when that is achieved a mutal decomissioning of all countries last remaining nuke should take place.
(please bare in mind that the North Koreans have repeatedly said they will give up their nukes and dismantle their Yongbyon reprocessing plant if the USA would only sign a non-aggression pact)
The removal of every last nuke in the World is a matter of trust and if we are ever to rid the World of this scourge chances have to be taken. Until such brave manouvers are undertaken, as I illustrated above, countries will fall by the wayside from the NPT and North Korea's actions will be repeated and repeated.
The Iranians only admitted to a peaceful nuclear program last year. A full 2 years before the United States government labelled them part of the Axis of Evil. Even before that invective the Iranians were demonized since the American Embassy in Tehran hostage situation. The Iranian revolution toppled the U.S backed Shah of Iran. The mutal mistrust of Iranians and Americans predates the Iranian nuclear program by a full 10 years.
Iran had first told the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that its last experiments with the reprocessing of plutonium took place in 1993 but revised that date to 1998, according to a draft speech deputy IAEA chief Pierre Goldschmidt is due to make to the agency's board of governors on Thursday.
To say that America will leave the Iranians alone if they abandon their nuclear program is optimisitic. Also any contradiction to the Iranians claims they are purely peaceful in their nuclear ambitions is to believe the Americans unfounded speculation. The IAEA has inspected Irans nuclear facilities and found absolutely nothing that points to weapons development. What does the US know that the IAEA doesnt?