Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
Every country wants to see fewer nuclear powers but no country including (or especially) the US wants to be the one to give them up.
The much-heralded SALT 2 treaty between Carter and Brezhnev merely capped the number of these horrendous weapons.
Good luck persuading other countries not to develop nukes when you possess thousands of them yourself.
Okay, but we have to deal with the reality as it exists NOW. You're correct that there's no going back and taking away the nuclear capabilities of the countries that already possess them. But it makes no sense why this should mean, "Oh, what the heck? Then let's let EVERY country who wants them have them!" is a sound ideological strategy.
Quote:
ISIS is a terrorist group than transcends national borders, so I don't know why you're bringing them into this.
I bring them into this because the more sources there are to obtain nukes from, the more likely it is that one of them will sell them a bomb capable of wiping out a major city. It has to do with math and simple probability. If my math is wrong, please point out my error.
Quote:
They have neither the sovereignty nor the means to develop ICBMs, and in any case are a diminishing power in the ME.
All it takes is one rogue nation to sell a nuke or even a dirty bomb. Again, the more sources there are, the more likely it happens. Also, the more countries that possess nuclear weapons, the more likely one of them uses them and a nuclear holocaust occurs. We can't go backwards and take away nuclear capabilities, so please respond with a forward thinking solution.