Nuclear weapons

Date: 06-09-2008 12:10 am (15 years ago) | Author: FORTUNE A
[1] 2 3 4
- at 6-09-2008 12:10 AM (15 years ago)
(m)
One of the cardinal point of US foreign policy from the 1950s till date is the prevention or containment of Nuclear proliferation.Put Differently,one of the most important item in the agenda of US foreign policy elite is not make sure more states of the world dont acquire Nuclear or Biological Weapons.The funny thing is,the USA ve the world's largest Nuclear arsenal.So why is a state that ve many spending so much time in making sure others dont ve?I argument is,America is not trying to stop Nuclear proliferation because of it thinks it's a threat to Global peace.American distrust for other states aspiring to join the Nuclear club is not predicated on a believe that these states would use it against themselves(i.e fellow small &/or medium powers).The major scare of the US is that these States will attack it.The US,especially under G.W.Bush,ve created to many enemies for itself.That is why the are championing the fight against proliferation.What do u think?

Posted: at 6-09-2008 12:10 AM (15 years ago) | Upcoming
- khadijah at 6-09-2008 03:36 AM (15 years ago)
(f)
this is just mainly reasons why most terrorist attacks are always against the US.they so much love the oppression and dont want to loose their title as most powerful nation for any reason..sometimes one cant help but admire these terrorist organisation...its just too bad the innocent suffers this cause...
Posted: at 6-09-2008 03:36 AM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- walerian at 6-09-2008 05:39 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
this is a good reason for Barrak Obama to be the next president of the U.S. the Bush administration is the worst eva. many people see U.S as Gods own country but i dont see it so. they breed terrorist and starts major war strikes. the realy oppress and dont want any other nation to grow betond them. but come to think of it, its presidency and administrators loves its citizen and their nation unlike our own govt.
Posted: at 6-09-2008 05:39 PM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- khadijah at 7-09-2008 12:22 AM (15 years ago)
(f)
Barrack being president wont change a thing...US is US...and as u pointed their govt isnt like ours.Obama will be put out of office before he starts messing up their system.
Posted: at 7-09-2008 12:22 AM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- walerian at 8-09-2008 12:38 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
i dont think so my dear, Obama has better plans for the citizens of U.s than his rival. mc cain is only goin to continue from where Bush stops which its citizens dont want. watch cnn for more on the race. no doubts abt obama being sidelined in the dying minutes but trust me he is the peoples choice cos they want change.
Posted: at 8-09-2008 12:38 PM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- khadijah at 8-09-2008 06:49 PM (15 years ago)
(f)
its always funny when africans are supporting obama..doesnt change the fact that he's an american
Posted: at 8-09-2008 06:49 PM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- Godsson at 8-09-2008 10:11 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
Khadijah!
U're right.We support Obama like if he wins,we'll start walking on gold.My only soft spot for him is inspired by the fact that him being President ll at least (even if for the short run)change the perception of the Black man by other races.
Posted: at 8-09-2008 10:11 PM (15 years ago) | Upcoming
Reply
- khadijah at 9-09-2008 02:31 AM (15 years ago)
(f)
well i dont think he becoming president will change that..the only people who see black as threats are whites..and we've done enough proving...the fact he's come this far is part of it.they will always continue to see blacks as threats cus they know we are strong....i even sometimes think its the guilt of slave trade that bothers them,thinking we might wanna start taking it out on them...
Posted: at 9-09-2008 02:31 AM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- walerian at 9-09-2008 01:21 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
we'll see abt dat. if the admin of Bush (whiteman) can be so cruel to its people, will it be a crime to give a black man (obama) a chance to adjust the failures of the present? he has convinced the people with points and examples and they want to go for a change. it not abt being a black man, its abt correcting the system especially wen it needs correction. tank u.
Posted: at 9-09-2008 01:21 PM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- khadijah at 9-09-2008 06:47 PM (15 years ago)
(f)
exactly...so y all the sentiments...ve never seen so much fuss bout US elections in such manner.
Posted: at 9-09-2008 06:47 PM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- walerian at 10-09-2008 11:59 AM (15 years ago)
(m)
cos its strange to av a blackman who knows much abt govt and willin to change the system to a more suitable one.
Posted: at 10-09-2008 11:59 AM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- TheTruth at 30-09-2008 12:27 AM (15 years ago)
(m)
Godsson

I agree with you that aspiring powers should be allowed to own Nukes.However,a state like Iran must not be allowed to do so.A state like that cannot be trusted with such strategic weapons.lest,they will use them unwisely.
Posted: at 30-09-2008 12:27 AM (15 years ago) | Newbie
Reply
- zie85er at 30-09-2008 01:05 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
i think there should be control in how states use their nuclear power.....there r unpredictable elements in sme places

Posted: at 30-09-2008 01:05 PM (15 years ago) | Hero
Reply
- Godsson at 30-09-2008 02:24 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
ZIE
Posted: at 30-09-2008 02:24 PM (15 years ago) | Upcoming
Reply
- Godsson at 30-09-2008 02:25 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
ZIE
How can u achieve this control?
Posted: at 30-09-2008 02:25 PM (15 years ago) | Upcoming
Reply
- zie85er at 30-09-2008 10:11 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
sincerely.......with my knowledge of global affairs, i dont know..

Posted: at 30-09-2008 10:11 PM (15 years ago) | Hero
Reply
- keveen at 1-10-2008 11:09 AM (15 years ago)
(m)
Let everyone get its own Nuclear Weapon, so'em Blowww Da World Up to piece, then God'll judge!

Posted: at 1-10-2008 11:09 AM (15 years ago) | Gistmaniac
Reply
- Godsson at 1-10-2008 01:14 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
The ownership of Nukes does not necessarily mean blowing down the world.How many times ve the U.S & U.S.S.R used theirs during the Cold war?How many times ve India & Pakistan used theirs used theirs against each other?Nuclear weapons are for "DETERRENCE" It limits Ur spending on conventional weapons.Militarily weak states dont challenge Nuclear powers easily.
Posted: at 1-10-2008 01:14 PM (15 years ago) | Upcoming
Reply
- easylifeg at 1-10-2008 07:57 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
think its getting us crazy cus they gat more than any other state in the world but i tell you the fact naija get more pass them na cold we dey cold ooo
Posted: at 1-10-2008 07:57 PM (15 years ago) | Newbie
Reply
- zie85er at 2-10-2008 10:37 PM (15 years ago)
(m)
wetin?

Posted: at 2-10-2008 10:37 PM (15 years ago) | Hero
Reply
[1] 2 3 4