Quote:
Originally posted by Colin@Feb 26 2003, 08:23 PM
PD, the world is not fair. Some people want all countries to play by the same rules for some strange reason. That makes no sense to me.
Why can some countries have nuclear weapons and not others? Because some countries developed them first and will threaten others into not using them. Too bad. People often ask if it is "fair" that the US can have weapons of mass destruction while other countries cannot. The answer is no. The world is not fair.
|
Ironhorse - Huh? Tankers sink. Old tankers sink frequently. Am I missing a whole conspiracy?
Colin ... my point on the commercial and economic arrangements that other nations may have with Iraq is very, very simple. Since the United States is not an imperialistic power bent on capturing Iraq for ecomonic purposes, there is no reason in the world NOT to make assurances to the French and Germans about their financial arrangements with Iraq. We are only doing this to eliminate the danger to the Iraqi people, their neighbors and the world that Saddam Hussein's rouge regime and his horrid weapons of mass destruction represents, right? Frankly, it would be an intelligent PR move on behalf of the Bush folks - kinda stalls the "all about oil" arguement.
With regard to the "fairness" issue (which I didn't bring up, and don't quite get how it worked its way into the discussion, but okay, I'll play) - the United States, the exisiting nuclear powers, and the other nations of the world, understanding the dangers that unchecked proliferation of nuclear weapons poses, created a treaty framework to limit their spread. The United Stated did not dictate to the world, "we've got them, you can't have them." You will notice that the Bush Administration is not saying to the North Koreans "we told you you can't do that." They are invoking the nonproliferation treaty and the U.N.