Subject:
|
Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 May 2005 13:54:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1041 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Parsons wrote:
<snip>
| |
Its a tricky thing.
There’s no doubt that the world is more stable with less nuclear weapons.
And there is a good argument that (Western) countries with much to lose are
less likely to use these weapons. Its only places or people with not much
to lose or the real prospect of losing everything that find these weapons
attractive.
|
|
Richard is right as far as he goes, where he falls down is in his prescription
for how to change countries to be free...
| |
<snip>
My take is simply this: nukes cannot be trusted to countries under the
leadership of despots, dictators, and other illegitate rulers.
|
You mean like the US???
| |
Democracy
is the key-- when people are free to determine their own destinies for their
countries, and NOT under control by some insane, petty, self-serving tyrant,
|
You mean like Dubya ???
| |
then these questions naturally work themselves out.
|
I agree!
| |
Put the power (nuclear or otherwise) in the hands of the people.
|
That too. I think the second admendment goes up to personal tanks in
applicability...
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
