1) Nationalism/pride. This is the primary motivation behind both India and Pakistan getting the bomb.
2) Lack of interest by Western countries in the spread of nuclear weapons, since the end of the Cold War. Quite a joke considering in the Gorbachev era we were all told to be worried about those ill-guarded former Soviet missiles. Pakistan's bomb was made with stolen French technology, and stolen American detonators (sort of stolen: the Bush admin doesn't want it investigated, which is why Sibel Edmonds has been silenced). Also, when Libya normalised relations, this was as a reward for telling Western intelligence about ex-Pakistan nuclear proliferation- the neocons crowed about the invasion of Iraq being the motivator- but they made sure the claims were never followed up.
3) Lack of effort by the international community to get a common approach to the problem. While all countries are to blame for this, Bush's 'we reserve the right to make up our foreign policy on the run with no commitment to basic principles' renders any third-country efforts moot.
4) Lack of interest in disarming rogue nuclear states or destroying installations.
5) Increasingly inconsistent US foreign policy, and manipulation of US public to engage in neocon wars- meaning threatened countries want nukes to prevent attacks.
2007-03-30 16:41:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by llordlloyd 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
A 50 megaton hydrogen bomb can make the city of Tehran,Iran vanish from the face of this planet. Every sovereign nation on this planet has a right to protect itself. In today's world, the ultimate perceived device for protection is the nuclear bomb. Since the very small atomic bombs used to end World War II in Japan, there have not been any nuclear attacks by one nation against another. The obvious reason for this is in most cases, is mutual destruction. Ironically, the threat or certainty of mutual destruction seems to be the reason that no nuclear attacks have occurred. Now, with some of the world "leaders" being insane or mentally unbalanced, the chances of a nuclear attack have increased, especially in the Mid-East, such as Iran versus Israel.
2007-03-30 22:41:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by john c 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Technology for nucelar power generation is also able to be used for military reasons. The effect of nuclear power is to eliminate more severe dependencies on alternate sources of fuels. The possibilites of advanced expertise and alternate usage drive nations to want the technology as well.
2007-03-30 22:20:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The desire for political dominance and hegemony. If you understand that the world is (and forever has been) on the verge of war, a lot of what goes on out there is easier to understand. The struggle to be top dog is everlasting. We're no less aggressive than wolves or lions, just more sophisticated.
2007-03-30 22:22:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by bullwinkle 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Fear that your enemy will attack you, monumental distrust by Joe Stalin was probably the single biggest factor.... The chief tenets of the MAD doctrine meant that a state of equilibrium would exist in the world...the alternative being global suicide.
2007-03-31 03:14:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
yada yada yada
2007-03-30 22:17:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋