Some nations are more equal then others

What makes one nation more equal then another? Isn't the "international laws" supposed to be same for every country just as laws in a country should be same for every person?

What i am trying to get at here is the MSM hot topics we see on a weekly basis worrying over if North Korea or Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons or only energy.

Countries get together and want sanctions and even justification for war with the argument "they are making nuclear weapons".

Why should they not be allowed to make as many reactors and bombs as they want?

As long as it is generally accepted USA/Russia/Israel/China/You name it/ has nukes, no-one should have anything to say about any country doing the same.


Don't get me wrong here, i am no apocalypse lover. I would wish every country in the world would come together and agree to dismantle all nuclear weapons and sign an international ban for using/having nuclear weaponry. Then if some countries did not comply it would be acceptable to invade them under international law and force them to comply.

Keep in mind USA is the only country that has actually used a nuke in war (correct me if im wrong!), so logically we should be most worried that USA stocks nukes. From this perspective NK or Iran is more entitled to have defensive nuclear weaponry then allmighty america.

But as long as one has nukes, everyone must be allowed to have nukes. Simple as Cake.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by above]

I completely agree that it is hypocritical for the more developed states to tell Iran that it can't develop nuclear power. Iran doesn't even want to develop nuclear weapons, but even if it did, you have a valid point. Especially when Israel and the United States classify Iran as an enemy, how are the Iranians supposed to deter war when they are not allowed to attain nuclear weapons.

Originally posted by above
But as long as one has nukes, everyone must be allowed to have nukes. Simple as Cake.
[edit on 20-1-2010 by above]

Yeah - if that cake is crazy and wants to wipe other countries off the map ( Iran ) or if that cake has a crazy little dictator that starves his own people ( NK ) or if that cake has been embroiled in many years of civil war ( a lot of African nations )

You see - its not really that simple. In a perfect world no criminals would own guns, meth wouldnt kill you and crazy leaders wouldn't be in power.

Yes the United States DID use such a weapon - not nuclear but atomic - and yes there is a difference. We used it twice to end a very horrific war. Such a war has not happened since. Was it a good idea to use them? history has to judge that. Was it in humanities best interest to use them? To stop a war, yes - to kill so many innocent people? Of course not!

But, the fact that the US did at one time MANY years ago use an atomic weapon cannot in good conscience be used as an argument as to why so many rouge nations should have access to nuclear weapons.

The king of england once used the beheading of wives as a way around divorce - should we all be alllowed to do so? My ex-wife probably says NO!

Dorian Soran

The Good Doctor

reply to post by Dorian Soran


You call 'em rogue nations. They probably call USA the real global terrorists. What makes you think you are correct? The same thing that makes them think they are correct.

And yes, a history of atomic warfare is the best indication of atomic warfare that will be utilized in the future. Killing civilians is a war crime and USA knew exactly what they were doing with the atom bombs. I would call this rogue.

btw. What is the difference between atomic and nuclear weapons ?

[edit on 20-1-2010 by above]

reply to post by Dorian Soran


Iran wants to wipe other countries off the map? Have you taken a look at our own country lately? Give me a break.

Denied. You should try it.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Namaste]

Originally posted by above

btw. What is the difference between atomic and nuclear weapons ?

There are two basic types of nuclear weapon. The first type produces its explosive energy through nuclear fission reactions alone. Such fission weapons are commonly referred to as atomic bombs or atom bombs (abbreviated as A-bombs), though their energy comes specifically from the nucleus of the atom

The second basic type of nuclear weapon produces a large amount of its energy through nuclear fusion reactions. Such fusion weapons are generally referred to as thermonuclear weapons or more colloquially as hydrogen bombs (abbreviated as H-bombs), as they rely on fusion reactions between isotopes of hydrogen (deuterium and tritium). However, all such weapons derive a significant portion – and sometimes a majority – of their energy from fission (including fission induced by neutrons from fusion reactions). Unlike fission weapons, there are no inherent limits on the energy released by thermonuclear weapons.

en.wikipedia.org...

Dorian Soran

The Good Doctor