Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kumar who wrote (2990)	8/7/2007 1:41:08 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

Hawk, here is how I look at it - we are the only country that has nuked another country. Yet, we carry a huge clout in saying which other countries can and can not have nukes. If that is not a contradiction, I do not know what is. Those countries that do not sign the Non-proliferation treaty have the full right to develop nuclear weapons. Just as we have the right to not trade with them, or to choose not to normalize relations. But when they accept the "incentives" of the NPT, they have an obligation to uphold that treaty. And when they choose to violate it, they accept the dis-incentives that come with it. Those dis-incentives include international condemnation, economic sanctions, and diplomatic isolation. And when they threaten to wipe other countries off the face of the map, they invite pre-emptive strikes. There used to be a time when a government verbally threatening the very existence of another nation would invite immediate hostilities. But we've gotten away from that principle, for some reason... Maybe for the very same reason that you seem to ignore the fact that the reason the US used nuclear weapons was because it was involved in a total war with a nation that had committed blatant aggression against us. And the use of those weapons insured that millions of people (in both countries) remained alive. If you read the history of Truman's decision, it was not one that was taken lightly. He understood what he was unleashing upon the world. And he also understood that it was going to be political suicide for him to choose to let 1/2 million GIs perish in an invasion of the home islands when he could have bombed Japan into submission with nuclear weapons. Maybe that's why we have a lot of clout on the matter. We don't want to have to face making that decision again. Hawk