Just a general question. Not saying I am comfortable with countries such as North Korea etc. having them but I am sure that they are not so keen on the USA having them either. What qualifications does a counrty need before they are considered "trustworthy"
2007-06-06 04:17:39 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hypocrisy. Trustworthy? Being lapdogs like the British would be a good start.
2007-06-06 04:29:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not think it is about a country being trustworthy. The real issue is whether a country would use those weapons against the US or our allies. We have the most powerful military in the world. That is what gives us the right to decide who can and who cannot have a nuke. If we do not like the idea of North Korea having a nuke we could bomb North Korea and destory their entire country.
2007-06-06 04:27:58 · answer #2 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We don't threaten other countries with them. We have no problem with China or even Russia having them either. But North Korea and Iran are dangerous and have lobbied a lot of threats over the table over the years. Would you feel better if we had nothing to defend our self with ? Do you honestly think we are the bad guys here? think again.
2007-06-06 04:22:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because we're not the tyrants (that some here would like us to believe we are) and wouldn't begin a nuclear war without reason. Some of the true tyrants out there wouldn't think twice.
We're set up to protect other countries as well as our own.
2007-06-06 04:32:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its a matter of balance.
Barring the destruction of the nuclear arsenal of every country in the world, the US needs its supply to maintain balance worldwide.
The international community decides whether or not a country is allowed to have them and they do not see the U.S. as a threat to use them.
2007-06-06 04:41:28 · answer #5 · answered by drmosesisdead 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not about trustworthiness, it's about we have them and we are a threat to any nation that crosses us so long as we have them. They are collateral, anyone that wants to mess with us has to face the reality that we can wipe their country off the map. Not exactly noble, but effective.
2007-06-06 04:21:55 · answer #6 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well, considering we invented them, and the only reasons other countries have them is by spying and stealing the info.....
but putting all that aside...
we used them, we know what they do, we know how bad they are....
so, lets say you have this new... this new......... ehhh..... ah! this new car.... and it can´t go slower than 70 mph.... just can´t, impossible..... would you let people drive this car if they´ve never driven before, or if they didn´t have a "clean" drivers license?
you wouldn´t let a little kid play with a blow-tourch either....
2007-06-06 04:36:11 · answer #7 · answered by James R 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well until they are completely gone, having them is the only thing that keeps other people from using theirs on us.
.
2007-06-06 04:22:48 · answer #8 · answered by McClintock 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
they know how bad they are and wish we did have them our selves,nor any one else.
2007-06-06 04:22:44 · answer #9 · answered by tom the plumber 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are a democracy.
2007-06-06 04:25:06 · answer #10 · answered by John L 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋