It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Sep
Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.
Originally posted by JoshGator54
In many threads discussing nukes for Iran and North Korea a common arguement is being used. The arguement is based on "fairness". They argue that it is not right for the United States to demand other countries not have nukes while the US has the largest stockpile in the world.
The first and foremost requirement of the US govt is to do what is best for the citizens of the United States, not what is best for Europe, the middle east, or any other part of the world. I am sure this is what angers the rest of the world but the govt of Iran owes the US nothing either, they should do what is best for their citizens as well. Is it hypocritical for Iran to want nukes but not want to allow Iraq to have any? I believe that a government can only be hypocritical when it places its own citizens in greater danger.
India and Pakistan obtained nukes and there was no war with the US. Mainly because if they used the nukes it would be on each other. If Iran or NK used their nukes it is very likely that it would be inside US borders. That poses a direct threat to American citizens. Any presidential administration would have to deal with this.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this, lets keep it civilized!
Originally posted by masterp
Your view is childish, to say the least, and the only thing it does is to strengthen the views of the non-US people in here that US is hypocritical to the max.
But I justify your opinion, since you feel part of the elite (as a member of the 'best' country), and you want this situation never to cease. People always hang on to power with everything they've got.
The reason I am saying the above is that ALL HUMANS ARE EQUAL, ALL HUMANS ARE THE SAME. There may be variations in intelligence, in wealth, in civilisation types, but, we are all 99% alike. Therefore, all the governments of the world should work towards SERVING EARTH'S INTERESTS, and NOT ONLY THEIR PEOPLE'S INTERESTS! by serving the interests of only a handful of people, a large part of the world is ignored. Furthermore, interests of one country may be in conflict with interests of other countries. When there is an interest conflict, there may wars, people may die for others to serve their interests.
So it's highly hypocritical to say "let US serve its interests, just like Iran serves its interests". Both US and Iran, and everyone else that serves only their own interests are wrong. We should all work towards a united humanity.
Of course I don't mean to level everything to the same level. I don't think it's right for anyone to loose their culture. But the level of awareness must be raised. People must wake up and see that their actions affect all others in the world. People must act responsibly to the world, to EARTH!
Of course, there is one big obstacle: religions. From the moment religions are in conflict, there is gonna be war, no matter what. This wouldn't be a problem if human technology had not reached a level that life on Earth can be destroyed multiple times over! so we, as humanity, must re-examine religions, and their values.
In order for the human race to survive, we can not have people say "we serve our own interests, others be damned!". We are all doomed with such an attitude!
Originally posted by JoshGator54
Who cares more about the world? North Korea, Iran, or the United States?
How does creating a nuclear program "serve earth's purpose"?
I believe my view is realistic and, if history teaches us anything, the way the world works. Your view on the other hand seems idealistic and fictional, maybe you took one too many trips on "It's a Small World" my friend!
By the way I never claimed the United States was elite, no putting words in my mouth please.
Finally I believe contries should work to better the lives of their citizens first not only. I never said anything about others be d*mned.
Originally posted by white_angel0789
Ok this is a very interesting topic to make my first post...I belive America is hypocritical as well (now dont get me wrong i love my country and would die for it) but we as many other countries have many problems too.
I mean the war is to fight TERRORISM isnt it? Well Iraq is NOT the only country that supports terrorism...I mean Afghanistan is the one who did
9-11 was it not? so why are we now in Iraq?? Shouldnt we have took care of afghanistan first if the war was only on terrorism..I belive there is more to the war then just the small attepmts to disable us.
Originally posted by white_angel0789
That is very true, and i see how America has made great advances to a better life in Iraq...But i believe that America shouldnt as quick to judge as we are...We have Nukes..I know it for fact..They might not be on our soil..But it is in our possesion. My dad actually helped BUILED a storage place FOR nuclear weapons for Cuba! now tell me that isnt a tad hypocritical.
Originally posted by Bulldog 52
The only reason a country develops Nuclear Bombs is to make sure that it cannot be threatened by another country into doing things it doesn't want to do.
Originally posted by Bulldog 52
The only reason a country develops Nuclear Bombs is to make sure that it cannot be threatened by another country into doing things it doesn't want to do.I find it somewhat inconceivable that the only Countries that are allowed this weapon of mass destruction are America Britain etc. Why cant other Countries have the bomb as well?I don't want it to happen , but i see hypocrisy here.
Originally posted by JoshGator54
Quake -
I don't believe Iran could in anyway attack a carrier group without nukes, we are talking about a large number of ships, that are highly defended. For a country like Iran to take out that many ships at once would be a huge blow to the United States.
You are correct Iraq is not the only country that supports terrorism. We do still have troops based in Afghanistan and missions they execute ocasionally make the news.
But I don't see how that is hypocritical, maybe I am missing your point. It can't be denied that terrorism is being thwarted, look at the recent successes in Lybia and Lebannon (Syrian troop withdrawl).
Of course the US has nukes; on the soil, subs, and planes. The point of my thread is that doesn't matter. Should we go around giving the most dangerous countries on the planet nukes?
A country's duty is to protect its citizens. At this point in time nations like NK and Iran need to understand that obtaining nukes puts them in a much more dangerous situation than if they abandoned the program and declared they were ready to enter the civilzed world, while retaining thier culture. If that were to happen the conflict would be over.
Originally posted by xpert11
With the doctrine of MAD I agree that it would exist between Israel and Iran but between Iran and the US it just wouldn't exist.
MAD has its flaws if one side has good intel they could lanuch nukes against key targets and destory the enemys ablity to lanch a counter attack. The reason that MAD succeed in the Cold war was because of the sheer number of targets and the geographic size of the USA and Soviet Union.
I have nothing against the likes of the USA and the Soviet Union reducing the amount of nukes in there stockpiles. What concerns me is what happens to the nukes when they are removed from the frontlines in the likes of the soviet union where corrupation is wide spread.
Originally posted by masterp
........
The reason I am saying the above is that ALL HUMANS ARE EQUAL, ALL HUMANS ARE THE SAME. There may be variations in intelligence, in wealth, in civilisation types, but, we are all 99% alike. Therefore, all the governments of the world should work towards SERVING EARTH'S INTERESTS, and NOT ONLY THEIR PEOPLE'S INTERESTS! by serving the interests of only a handful of people, a large part of the world is ignored. Furthermore, interests of one country may be in conflict with interests of other countries. When there is an interest conflict, there may wars, people may die for others to serve their interests.
So it's highly hypocritical to say "let US serve its interests, just like Iran serves its interests". Both US and Iran, and everyone else that serves only their own interests are wrong. We should all work towards a united humanity.
Of course I don't mean to level everything to the same level. I don't think it's right for anyone to loose their culture. But the level of awareness must be raised. People must wake up and see that their actions affect all others in the world. People must act responsibly to the world, to EARTH!
........
In order for the human race to survive, we can not have people say "we serve our own interests, others be damned!". We are all doomed with such an attitude!
Originally posted by JoshGator54
Quake-
Most importantly please understand I do not, repeat do not, suggest we should threaten to nuke countires willy nilly, as you suggested.