Threat of nuclear annihilation.
One thing that I can safely and confidently predict in 2009 is that nuclear weapons will not be abolished as yet!. Would it be just wonderful in theory to remove the threat of nuclear annihilation once and for all in this modern era?.
While there this growing talk about out-right abolition is the world’s failure to achieve the much more modest objective of preventing new countries from joining the nuclear club.
The haves (USA, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan) must learn that unless they themselves talk about their own eventual disarmament, how can the have-nots will agree in preventing further proliferation in the nuclear race ?.
The basic grievance of the have-nots is that the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty does not require the haves to give up their nuclear powers and existing arsenals!.
Indeed, if the haves show no sign of living up to this side of the bargain, the haves-nots’ resentment will only grow bigger.
Countries like Iran and North Korea will become less and less willing to agree to the sharper inspections that will be needed as nuclear know-how and materials spread more widely across the world at large.
In fact, if the haves decide to abolish their nuclear weapons, the practical difficulties of doing so would be really immense.
Is abolition just a pipe dream ?.
Unfortunately, I see lots of hypocrisy, the haves will pretend to believe in abolition and the have-nots may pretend to believes them. ,,,,,,,hahaha what a big laugh yaaaaa.
Yooooooo.
One thing that I can safely and confidently predict in 2009 is that nuclear weapons will not be abolished as yet!. Would it be just wonderful in theory to remove the threat of nuclear annihilation once and for all in this modern era?.
While there this growing talk about out-right abolition is the world’s failure to achieve the much more modest objective of preventing new countries from joining the nuclear club.
The haves (USA, Russia, Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan) must learn that unless they themselves talk about their own eventual disarmament, how can the have-nots will agree in preventing further proliferation in the nuclear race ?.
The basic grievance of the have-nots is that the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty does not require the haves to give up their nuclear powers and existing arsenals!.
Indeed, if the haves show no sign of living up to this side of the bargain, the haves-nots’ resentment will only grow bigger.
Countries like Iran and North Korea will become less and less willing to agree to the sharper inspections that will be needed as nuclear know-how and materials spread more widely across the world at large.
In fact, if the haves decide to abolish their nuclear weapons, the practical difficulties of doing so would be really immense.
Is abolition just a pipe dream ?.
Unfortunately, I see lots of hypocrisy, the haves will pretend to believe in abolition and the have-nots may pretend to believes them. ,,,,,,,hahaha what a big laugh yaaaaa.
Yooooooo.
