English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

But, lesser countries can not? Surely there must be some sort of double standards occurring here? Why isn't there a global push for all nuclear weapons to be destroyed? How can one side have all the firepower they like, yet if a middle eastern country arms themselves with a hand gun, we unleash hell?

2007-07-23 17:07:51 · 4 answers · asked by lee h 3 in Politics & Government Military

4 answers

Ah, every heard of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty ?

Actually those smaller countries can have nukes.

They just have to decide if they would rather have nukes, or trade relations with the west.

Interesting thing " trade " the West has no obligation to trade with any country it doesn't want to trade with.

That's their Right as sovereign nations.

In the case of North Korea, NK decided they would rather have trade relations with everyone, than to have nukes.

In the case of Iran, Iran hasn't made that decision yet, so they get to live with no trade.

There is a global push to eliminate most nuclear weapons.

The last agreement between the US and Russia, calls for each side to have 2,000 nuclear weapons each.

Thats a long way from 30 years ago, when both sides had 60,000 nuclear weapons.

2007-07-23 17:20:32 · answer #1 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 2 0

Because those with the biggest guns can tell everyone else what to do.

Seriously, MOST nations that have nukes have stable governments. Countries that do not have stable governments should not have nukes.

2007-07-24 00:18:02 · answer #2 · answered by hannibal61577 4 · 3 0

Sorry, the Pandora's box has been opened and there's no turning back. wished it were different. You can thank the Stalins, Hitlers, Kim's of the world for this state....

2007-07-24 10:47:55 · answer #3 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0 0

They developed it first.

2007-07-24 00:13:37 · answer #4 · answered by bobanalyst 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers