<<<We could produce some arguments- but a "rationale" is not a "right", imo. >>
Right equals
Upright, virtuose, .just, fitting, suitable,properly,correctly, belonging to by law or nature
I think we could fit the action in as a "law of nature", winner take all, to the victor go the spoils,might makes right.
Not the stuff sellable to the UN or the public.
I believe we need more of a "rationale", a sensible or sane reason , or explanation of principles, the acceptance of reason as the only authority for determining a course of action.
The Principle being a desire to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons on behalf of making the world a safer place. A Principle already advanced by the UN.
Sounds like a sane or sensible reason for the masses.
What reason or argument can the non-nuclear powers present other than to say we have a "right" to be just as powerful and have the same terrifying weapons as anyone else.
From where did they get that right? God given? Pretty weak rationale.
I dont have a right to carry a gun into the airport,.or pretend to be a policeman. Does a leader of an African tribe in a country of 500 citizens have a "right" to buy nuclear arms- or does the leader of N Korea.
He may say "I have a right to protect myself against the US or China". That is unsaleable hogwash, there is no protection if you pull one of those tigers tails
My guess is that any action against N Korea will be done with the approval of the UN.
Sig
. .
. |
