Does America, a nuclear power, have the right to stop another nation from acquiring it?

Answer 1

No.

Even if America is not a nuclear power, it does not have the right to stop others from acquiring it.

But American has the right to be concerned.

Answer 2

Of course the US and the rest of the world has a right to defend itself. We can't take the chance that rogue countries will act responsibly with the weapons they develop, especially when they make overt threats internationally even now (eg Iran, North Korea). That's what happened with Germany and Japan's aggression and war making in the last World War. We now have the United Nations of countries that vote on whether a single country is threatening it's neighbors or not. So it's not just the United States that is arguing against Iran and North Korea's use of nuclear weapons. Many countries have developed nuclear power for peaceful purposes including Iran and North Korea. Now North Korea apparently has a nuclear weapon that they threaten to launch against other countries including the United States. So the sooner other countries band together in the United Nations to discourage rogue countries from becoming another World War II Germany or Japan, the better.

Answer 3

Yes; it's in the interest of the US to stop some other countries from acquiring nuclear weapons and every nation in the world has the right to look out for it's own interests. That may not be fair, but life ain't fair.

Answer 4

No other nation should see to acquire it. The more nations that have "the bomb" the greater the chance someone will use it. The last thing we want is a Kim Jong Il to have it, or some crazed religious government like Iran's.

Nuclear war is evil.

The US is not alone in wanting to stop the spread of nukes.

Answer 5

Nuclear War and the entire concept of nuclear warfare is insane. That ship sailed in WWII. The cat is out of the bag. When the reality behind the use of a nuclear explosion was finally accepted it was too late to eliminate the stockpiles and balance of power in existence. Anyone trying to gain access to that particular brand of insanity is in the obvious pursuit of the worst type of insanity. Should this be allowed? If a person on my block drives to Wal-Mart to buy a shot gun, a giant chicken suit, a case of chocolate soft drinks, 3 bottles of vodka pours a gallon of gasoline on himself and starts placing targets on the front doors of all my neighbors don't you think I should stop him before he starts screaming and shooting people while trying to get his Zippo lighter to work???? Maybe you're right. Maybe I have no right to stop the madness. I should just let him set himself and his giant chicken suit on fire and start shooting me my children and all my neighbors.


Lunatic.

Answer 6

Yes!!!!!!! If we are to continue to be a dominant world power than we certainly can't let our known enemies acquire such deadly technology. It's like when Lex Luther was allowed to learn Superman's secrets :)

Answer 7

To be honest, I don't believe the US should have any say about any other country. Who died and made us the boss? What would bush say if France came here and took our **** away? I think we just need to leave everyone alone. And that everyone should leave everyone else alone. Everyone's going to die the same way in the end anyhow. Over population.

Answer 8

I do not believe so, but although I am strictly anti-bush it is fair to say that by stopping some countries he may be saving the world.

Answer 9

yes. we are a civilized power. we have to have it for deterrence or other crazy countries with tiny idiot dictators can go around a blow people up. no sane leader wants mutually assured destruction (mad). and that is why we have nukes.

Answer 10

If you are referring to weapons,we not only have the right but the responsibility.