is it just for the US to use military force to prevent acquisition of nuclear weapons by threatening nations?

Question

resolved: it is just for the united states to use military force to to prevent the aquisition of nuclear weapons by nations that pose a military threat.
hey, im an LDerr, and this is the new rez for jan/feb. i already did some research on this, but im not sure if what i have is good. i would reaaly appreciate it if some one could post a list of points for AFF or Neg (or both) as an answer. thanks!

this is all great, but is there by any chance a debater out there who could possibly help me choosing standards or the VC (ill be using justice as my premise becasue its inherrent to the resolution)
also, perhaps and reasons as to why we shouldnt take military action?
<3 thanks

Answer 1

Yes because if they already pose a military threat then the acquisition of nuclear weapons would increase the likelihood of use and conflict. MAD worked because we (Russia and the U.S.) both had enough to completely destroy the other and both knew it plus both did care about the end result to their country. A country having very limit ted capability would be tempted to use it if losing in the hope that no massive retalition would occur-Don't pick on the little guy that is all he had world opinion. If a person wants to hurt you and has said so are you going to let him hit you with the new baseball bat he just bought in January or try to keep him from using it. You could not wait and see if they will use the nuclear weapons because then it is too late but should stop the acquisition if possible to start with.

Answer 2

There are certain countrys that simply should not have nukes at all ever. If it takes a country like the USA to stand up and say something about it then so be it. But we should not be alone we are part of the allies right? Well where are our allies? As stated before what can be done with a enemy that has nothing to loose? some certain things i do find to be very suspicious. Such as a country that is bombarded by sun asking for nuke power over a sophisticated solar array.

Answer 3

Yes.
If a nation is a threat.
Iran has stated it's desire to wipe Israel off the map. Their stated goal is the destruction of America and Western Culture. This is not the type of country that we can trust to have nuclear weapons. Some of the religious fanatics that are in charge of that county would not hesitate to use nukes even if it meant the destruction of their own country when the west retaliated.

Answer 4

Hey john- Saddam did have WMD's- A WMD is a weapon of mass destruction defined as nuclear chemical biological or radiological. we know that Saddam had chemical weapons- remember when he gassed the Kurds?

Answer 5

Several other countries have used military force in the past to prevent other countries from gaining Nuclear weapons

Answer 6

Absolutley just, and the right thing to do!

If a foreign state exhibits it cannot be trusted in the international arena, they mus be stopped at all costs from possesing weapons that can do so much to so many.

Answer 7

No, it's already been done by the Israelis.. We only talk the talk but haven't yet done the walk....

Answer 8

Would it have been just for Germany to attack the US while we were in the development stages, since we were their main threat?

Answer 9

U.S was the first to use nukes on civillians(not military) so they hve no right it is up too the world to decide not a nazi country with such a brutal history of killing civillians

Answer 10

yes, when they have stated that their goal is to cook and eat our children.