When Muslim states try to have nuclear technology even for power generation, US offend. The same time many of USA's friends have it. Even USA has singed an agreement with India to cooperate in nuclear power plants. Isn’t it a double stand?
2007-02-19 00:37:42 · 19 answers · asked by Udayambili. 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No it is not just, and it is a double standard, but it is how it is… Why?!!! Cuz we have the bomb!!! Now get into shape world or we are coming for you next… Except for New Zealand and Australia… you guys are cool, keep doing what you are doing. Great Britain your good too, but France... You are next on the list. : )
2007-02-19 00:45:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's all about oil. The USA will never allow any muslim major oil producer in the world to have nuclear weapons. Why? Because the USA has an oil-dependant economy. The USA is also Israel's chief ally. So, how can the USA demand oil supplies from muslim countries and support Israel at the same time? Answer :- By maintaining the threat of regime change, leaders of muslim countries will be subservient to the USA. However, once muslim countries gain nuclear weapons, they will no longer have to fear the USA and will have the bravery to stand up to the USA and say "Either you stop supporting Israel or you get no oil". That is why the USA will never allow any muslim oil producing country from acquiring nuclear weapons because nuclear might means genuine independence.
2007-02-21 00:01:46 · answer #2 · answered by ayatollah 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it is not justice based view and it is definitely double standard. After world war II even after having atom bombs no country used it any where. Possession of nuclear weapons require a very powerful command and control system which every country particularly indisciplined ones can not have. Unstable governments also cannot have the same. Nuclear weapons are existing now for deterrent purposes only as everyone knows that those are weapons of mass destruction and spreaders of higly dangerous radioactivity causing adverse effects for billios of years to come. That is the most worrying fact and because of that a nuclear war cannot be won by any one i.e., if acountry uses a nuclear weapon against another one and captures the land affected , that land is dangerous( because of its nuclear fallout )and hence useless for the winner too, as told by great defence analyst K. Subrahmaniam about 20 years ago in a lecture , as reported by newspapers. It is understood that such weapon holders will display extaordinary discipline for smaller and weaker countries and they will not bludgeon them into submission. Only USA is doing so and not other nuclear weapon states which has very - very badly shaken the confidence of most small nations both muslim as well as non muslim ones. That is the question of worry. But I am not at all in a position to provide any solution for that as I am not an expert. Ask any competent political scientist. My above views may be wrong too. Kindly excuse.
2007-02-21 03:59:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For all Americans answered before me:
There may be some truth in saying an unreliable country cannot have nukes. But then who is the judge of this unreliability. Most certainly not America. America is the country which is waging war all over the world. It is the ONLY country which used nukes to wipe out other countries. there are endless atrocities committed by Americans all over the world and they have the temerity to talk about reliability of other countries.
2007-02-20 23:19:37 · answer #4 · answered by ABDE 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why heck, let's just arm all the little third world countries with nukes that can blow up whole nations. Won't that make us all feel safe and comfortable when Ahmadinutjob (DEATH TO AMERICA AND ISRAEL) has the nuclear hammer he seems so hell bent on acquiring. Or, let's just have all the nations with nukes turn them over to the UN. They have been such a good supportive friend to the USA.
2007-02-19 09:17:08 · answer #5 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Russia has them, I wouldn't call us bosom buddies. When leaders of a country threaten to wipe out another country with said nuclear weapon, then we really need to think twice before allowing that kind of power in the hands of an idiot.
2007-02-19 08:44:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, it is not at all just. If USA can have nuclear weapons then all should be aloud to make it if not then they can also not use nuclear weapons.
2007-02-22 10:31:07 · answer #7 · answered by Dishant Shah 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only trusted governments should ever be allowed to have Nukes. And the more countries with Nuke tech. The more chance one will be used. there are too amny terrorist organizations who would love to get their hands on one and keep the world hostage.
2007-02-19 09:04:15 · answer #8 · answered by ALunaticFriend 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because muslim countries such as Iran have threatened to wipe many other countries off the map. Thats why.
They cant be trusted.
If you gave Iran a nuke today, they would drop it on Israel tomorrow.
2007-02-19 08:41:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Double standard?
Would you give your neighbor's 2 year old the keys to your car?
2007-02-19 11:33:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋