Posted on 01/15/2003 8:44:29 AM PST by philosofy123
The nuclear bombs issue, as well as the all the other chemical and biological weapons are very confusing dilemma to our world. Nations, and thinkers around the globe are confused with the hypocritical standards.
As we currently observing the crisis in Korea, and Iraq. N. Korea attempts to develop nuclear bombs, and its population is starving! It appears that for the sake of the North Korean people that its leaders should devote more resources to economic development, and reduce expenditures on military matters. However, tyrant leaders around the world do not have to be rational, or even care about being reelected, they simply follow their ego, and most of the time their militaristic approach to hold on to power.
Having said that, it is still perplexing for most observers to understand the double standards applied to nations and their WMD programs. The nonproliferation treaty itself appears to be difficult to swallow. On one hand, we say that China, Russia, USA, …are allowed to have nuclear bombs, and all sort of WMD, but no one else can! Does that make sense? Logical thinking may envision no country should be allowed to have such weapons? However, during the cold war, the nuclear weapons were the tools that restraint US/USSR from destroying each other? Now that the cold war is over, do we and the Russians have the right to hold on to our nuclear armadas, and deny other nations such rights?
Ten years ago, Muammer Qaddafi of Libya announced that Pakistan going to have the Moslem bomb. At that point, the US simply looked the other way. There was no significant world-wide uproar against Pakistan, a very poor country devoting significant resources to the development of such weapons, while their population is starving. Before Pakistan, India did the same thing, and got away with it, and before India, China did the same thing. Notice, I did not mention France, England, or Israel? The reason being these countries did not have starving populations as they built their nuclear bombs.
I certainly would never think for one minute that the US should destroy its nuclear weapons. Our big bombs are stored to be used for ultimate deterrent function. By the same thinking, Russia, and the rest of the nuclear nations should think about these horrible weapons in the same way-ultimate deterrent. However, emerging nations like Iran, Egypt, Iraq, N. Korea, Indonesia, Nigeria, South Africa, ……, all wants to join the club. In addition, developed nations, with non-starving population are also interested in obtaining these deterrent-bad boys, countries such as Japan, Germany, Australia,…..How can the world have double standards when it comes to WMD? I guess, there is no good answer to that dilemma?
I don't feel like contributing today.
~~~ Wait until you see "Unable to locate server"
I don't have money.
~~~Help with the fundraiser. Bump the threads, ping your FRiends.
There's plenty of time to donate.
~~~ Bill collectors don't see it that way.
I don't know where to contribute.
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
I' ve got too many other things to do first.
~~~ Don't we all?
I can't contribute much, what's five dollars.
~~~ If everyone contributed one dollar a month, we'd never have a fundraiser again.
The dog ate my credit card.
~~~ Shoot the dog.
Just let me finish freeping.
~~~BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Why should I be "allowed" to own handguns but not a gang-banger in South Central with a felony rap-sheet as long as your arm?...
Perhaps it is because I have demonstrated that I handle weapons responsibly and the gangsters run around "popping" each other and the police.
Double standard? Uh huh--imposed by reality.
--Boris
I go by a simpler philosophy: if he's too dangerous to be allowed to own a gun, then he's too dangerous to be loose on the street.
A hundred years ago, when you were released from prison, they gave you your guns back -- you were now a free citizen, and free citizens have the right to be armed. Those judged too dangerous to be allowed to walk around armed among their fellow citizens were hanged.
With long-rap-sheet gang bangers, after being convicted of the third violent felony, the jury should then be asked in the punishment phase whether the felon should just be executed at this point
True, but the metaphor does not extend all the way to nations. (Unless we have even more power, say the ability to knock out an entire population and revive them after the criminals have been extracted, like Captain Kirk would have done.)
I believe the current double standard is simply a time buying device. We may very well be working to stop North Korea and at the same time prosecute a war with Iraq. But one is being done under cover and one is more overt. Remember Kung Fu? How many times he managed to get all the thugs to attack him in a one at a time order so that he could dispatch them with ease? Its something like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.