NationStates Jolt Archive

With the nuclear non-proliferation treaty up for review, I was wondering how people felt about it.

Should the nuclear powers work to disarm?

Does Iran have a right to a nuclear deterrent in the light of bunker-busting bombs being sold to Israel?

The current nuclear powers should disarm.
AND
Iran has the right to have nuclear weapons.
:)

IF countries disarm, Iran has to disarm too.

Nuclear weapons seem a bit pointless to me.

Everyone should reduce their stockpiles to 5 maximum. There really is no need for the nuclear powers to go in for overkill.

How about every gets one, but only one. If you use it, it's gone, so you better think carefully before you do.

Well, given my current location and the fact the North Korea just shot another missle in Japan's general direction, you'll forgive me if I'm more intrested in getting them to disarm right now. ;)

I voted
'The current nuclear powers should totaly disarm'
'Iran should be prevented from developing nuclear weapons'
and
'Iran has a right to nuclear weapons'

Because nuclear weapons are WMDs with no other purpose than destroy. I don't see them working in war. (Post war reconstuction and such)

We should prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. But not just Iran, any country. That doesn't mean making them illegal for Iran. But we should always try to prevent situations where someone has to depend on extreme measures. And Of cource Iran has a right to nuclear weapons. If one country has them so does every other. At least those countries who have those weapons shouldn't have any saying on the matter. If we make them forbidden (I hope so) then lets make them forbidden for all of us.

Well, given my current location and the fact the North Korea just shot another missle in Japan's general direction, you'll forgive me if I'm more intrested in getting them to disarm right now. ;)

Why should they disarm?

The invasion of Iraq shows that the US, UK and their allies will invade countries they don't like on a flimsy pretext, doesn't North Korea have the right to defend itself?

Why should they disarm?

The invasion of Iraq shows that the US, UK and their allies will invade countries they don't like on a flimsy pretext, doesn't North Korea have the right to defend itself?

If North Korea would keep to itself or just for defence, perhaps, but since the 'Great Leader' has been known to do the unexpected for reaons that have very little to do with reality... I'd rather not wake up glowing because Kim Jong-Il got upset again that Princess Tenko wouldn't wear the special red panties he got for her (That's a true story, BTW, the panties thing I mean).

If North Korea would keep to itself or just for defence, perhaps, but since the 'Great Leader' has been known to do the unexpected for reaons that have very little to do with reality... I'd rather not wake up glowing because Kim Jong-Il got upset again that Princess Tenko wouldn't wear the special red panties he got for her (That's a true story, BTW, the panties thing I mean).

But why should Israel and the US and the UK have them, when we have been shown to be agressive by invading Iraq? Selling bunker busting bombs to the Israelis so they can bomb Iran? Surely you can see the hypocrisy?

But why should Israel and the US and the UK have them, when we have been shown to be agressive by invading Iraq? Selling bunker busting bombs to the Israelis so they can bomb Iran? Surely you can see the hypocrisy?
Indeed I do, I honestly have never understood the concept of MAD, or why the US continues to be self rightous over nukes when it can wipe mankind off the plant 10 times over. I would be much happier if no nuclear arms exsisted.

Being that's the case however, I am focusing more on North Korea as it is far more unpredictable than the US (even with Bush in the driver's seat). But yes, I disagree with the US's possession of nuclear arms, and I seriously disagree with Bush's and Rummy's proposal to start up nuclear testing once again. Of course since America's test site is in my home state, that might also be more along the lines of I dislike having nukes detonated in my home. ;)

The NPT was supposed to be a treaty where no new countries would get nukes AND the existing nuclear states would gradually eliminate them. In fact to encourage non nuclear countries to sign on to this terrible deal, the NPT requires that nuclear nations help non other nations to develop nuclear power for civilian uses. Therefore under the NPT the US would actually have to help Iran build nuclear power plants.

Therefore since all the NPT does is give the US a pretext for invading and crushing other countries and there is very little chance USA, Russia, UK and the rest will ever get rid of their nukes or even drasticly reduce them, the non proliferation treaty should be scrapped.

They should all disarm. And if the politicians have a problem with eachother they should fight in an arena to the death to settle their disputes.

W
Does Iran have a right to a nuclear deterrent in the light of bunker-busting bombs being sold to Israel?
Iranian nukes are not a "deterrent" against Israeli bunker busters. On the contrary, the reason Israel is buying bunker busters as a deterrent against Iran going nuclear- to be able to destroy Iranian nuclear installations in case of war.

Not to mention that Israel has had nukes for quite some time and never threatened anyone with them, while Iran is still working on acquiring nukes and has already threatened to nuke Israel and the US.