At 04:47 PM 7/20/01 +1200 K.Feete wrote:
>All right, we have symbolically refrained from using nuclear weapons on
>numerous occasions. But aren't we sort of the only people who've ever
>*used* nuclear weapons? Doesn't that sort of muck up our track record?
No, why would it?
In fact, we have been leaders in getting the world to institute measures to
ensure that nuclear weapons are basically never-ever used in conflict
between human parties again.
>All right, I agree that more nuclear weapons = bad; I agree that some
>nations should *definately* not have missles. But it seems a bit odd to
>me that, no matter what our record, no matter how much posturing we do,
>no matter *what*, we are the one, the only, country that has *ever*
>proved ourselves willing to use a nuclear weapon. Under such
>circumstances we must seem rather like arrogant hypocritical bastards to
>the rest of the world- "it's OK for *us* to nuke our enemies, but don't
>*you* do it."
Except that we have since rejected (if not formally, then de facto) the
right to use nuclear weapons as a first-strike option. Since we're not
going to use them unless you attack us, I don't think that anything is so
wrong with that.
Besides, your original proposal was that the "Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty" is hypocritcal. Given that you have agreed that some countries
should not have nukes, I don't see how you can continue to view this as
hypocrisy.
Indeed, let me ask you. Given that the US invented nuclear weapons, and
as the inventor, was thus, the first and only nation to use them. What
would be a non-hypocritcial US policy for the past 50 years, that would be
as good for the world as our current policy?
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
