2006-09-01 00:55:48 · 25 answers · asked by ajagvajag2002 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No country should be allowed to have nukes.
2006-09-01 01:01:51 · answer #1 · answered by Scully 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Fear is the reason .Chicken $hit people around the globe have to have nukes to feel safe .
A bomb that big means we all must have huge johnsons hanging between our legs and do not mess with us or else .
YOU can tell how affraid the terroists are of our super power .
THEY came they saw they Collapsed the world trade center and blew a hole in the pentagon and spread plane reckage accross pennsylvania.
I can tell how scared they are of people who have the Bomb .
SEEMS like it is a suicide bomb only to be used to kill everyone on earth and i do not care how bad it gets i still have hope that even after my own death . THAT it is possible for others to snap out of it and end conflicts without the need for Nukes .
HOW arrogant and selfish for someone to decide we all must die .
THATS what will happen if more then a couple start going off..
SEE today they are hundreds and thousands of times more deadly then in the past .
WE can even detonate them above an area and knock out all electronic devices .
So i wonder who will get the bright idea first to strike someone in this manner .
THATS why we have immediate responce systems , subs ,and planes ,that take flight instantly at the first signs of a launch .
We still after the end of the so called cold war have the real threat of a nuclear bomb going off in our nation .
SO it does not matter who starts it if more then a few go off it is over for all of us .
2006-09-01 01:27:05 · answer #2 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some countries are more stable than others, with government systems and ideologies that have been in place for hundreds of years, and some countries have government systems and ideologies that change ever couple years if not more often. Now I would prefer that the countries that had the stable governments for a long period of time be those permitted to have such weapons, if they are needed at all. Not countries that you don't know who your leader is each day until you read the newspaper to see if there was a coup in the night. That kind of weapon in the hands of whom ever was capable of wresting it from the other in the night is not a comforting thought. With this type of government, no one in the world would know from day to day, who had the power to launch such a weapon and if it would be set off for any minute reason or minimal offense. Would you really want someone who is capable of applauding a terrorist attack to have the ability to use such a weapon?
2006-09-01 01:04:52 · answer #3 · answered by whatelks67 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
All this nuclear hoopla started when the President accussed certain nations (Korea) of being a terroist country. Up till then there was really no mention of nuclear weapons. We went into Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction and found none and so we went to invade there country anyway. Now we are accusing Syria and Iran of supporting terroism etc and gee what do they do, they say we have a bomb watch your step. So we have threathened and they threathened back. The US would threathen the same action if we were accused of being terroist etc.
2006-09-01 01:29:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Countries like U.S., U.K., Israel, particularly in view of bombardment on Heroshima and Nagasaki, Cluster bombing on Afghan, Iraq, Lebenon and Plastene citizens, civilians, should not be allowed to possess. And thereafter other super powers / veto powers should be dispossessed and thereafter all other countries should be dispossessed from any sort of Nuclear Weapons. Manufacturing of any sort of Nuclear Weapons by all the countries of the World should be prohibited. But begining should not be from North Korea or Iran or India or Pakistan.
2006-09-01 01:42:44 · answer #5 · answered by bharathghf 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How many times does this question need to be answered? We are not the only one with Nuclear weapons. The world has tried to limit this with the non proliferation treaty which was signed by Iran by the way. Do your homework.
2006-09-01 01:18:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Many countries have nuclear weapons-'boy-george-bush' just gave India the go-ahead to make some more!
2006-09-01 01:29:41 · answer #7 · answered by Putt 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well I'm sure we want to be the only super power in the world for one. We also don't want certain countries that are under a certain rule such as totalitarian, dictatorship, comminsm and facism to have them because they'll probably be more likely to use them.... even thought the US is the only country that ever did use Nukes in the history of the world..... well you get what I say.
2006-09-01 01:03:41 · answer #8 · answered by Fiesty Redhead 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
wow this is getting old.
Because America and even the old USSR would have not used them...except in WW2.
Its a concept called MAD mutually assured destruction. IF you bomb us we'll bomb you.
The problem with Iran is that they dont give a damn about MAD.
They believe that death is life...
2006-09-01 01:06:32 · answer #9 · answered by smitty031 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Look at the USA and Israel and then look at the fruitcake in Iran.
Do you really want this nut and Little Kim to have nukes?
Wake up!
2006-09-01 02:15:44 · answer #10 · answered by G3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should any country have a nuclear weapon?
We may have nuclear weapons but we don't threaten other countries with them as the dumbass in Iran has said.
2006-09-01 00:58:14 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋