Who can/can not have WMD?

[nataliemarie]

Okay, so no one in my company like the talk politics... and I don't speak Korean, and I'm an avid devils advocate and love to debate. So, I must resort to the wonderful world we call: cyberspace.

While debating in an multi-national thread called: "WMD", this subject came up:

Why is it okay for America to have WMD and not Iraq?

Although the inquiry is at a much larger scale, it can be compared to a question such as:

Why is it okay for a certified nanny to babysit your kids, but not a convicted murderer?

Now, it is a little hard I'll admit because I seem to be the only person in that forum whom supports the US (except one guy who I think has gone mad!)... some of their comments:

1. "The UN must pull itself together, insist that ALL countries submit themselves to search, and oversee the destruction of ALL weaponry."

2. "Bush had a grudge. That's the only logical explanation for the Iraq war."

3. "..the USA has shown little regard for the UN's authority."

4. "Even if the US views itself as the only country that can be trusted to decide when war is right or wrong, most of the rest of the world does not see the US this way..."

and...

5. "While the Iraqi regime was useful to the West i.e. as an enemy of Iran, anything the regime did was ignored.
When Iran became less of a threat the powers that be thought it was time to get a more co-operative regime or maybe complete overt control."

It's not just us...

International Atomic Energy Agency: The Vienna, Austria-based agency monitors and inspects nuclear technology worldwide to certify that it is not being used to make weapons. It was established as an autonomous organization under the United Nations in 1957.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Under the terms of the treaty, known as NPT, five of the world's eight nuclear powers have agreed to disarm while the 182 non-nuclear signatories have agreed to remain free of nuclear weapons. India and Pakistan have refused to sign the treaty, which was created in 1968 and entered into force in 1970. Israel refuses to admit it has nuclear weapons.

Chemical Weapons Convention: This calls for the elimination of chemical weapons. The treaty was entered into force in 1997; 153 countries have signed and ratified it, including the United States.

Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention: This calls for eliminating biological weapons. The treaty was entered into force in 1975; 151 countries have signed and ratified it, including the United States.

*sigh*

[39mto39g]

My view.
The US compaired to all the rest of the 700 or so countries in the world.
I see it as kinda the person in charge. Any time you have a gathering of people one will stand out.
I guess its kind like 10 people in a room that have weapons, And one of the people is 2 feet taller and 150lbs heavier and spent 6 years in college acutually studying, The big person is the US. This person proceeds to disarm the rest for the good of the hole. One or two people object and are struck down and there weapons are removed by this persons force. The rest give up there weapons with out a fight, Now this person has to sleep, so this person gets a few friends and gives them weapons to "protect the group"
From time to time this person may have to agust who has and does not have weapons. If the group objects, this person may or may not listen, depending if it is in this persons best intrest.
Either way, this person is in charge of the group even if the group don't like that.

Ron

I am an American.
I do not belong to the UN,NATO,SEATO or any other initialized alledged entity.
The overrideing primary function of the folks I elect to government is to protect and defend the AMERICAN people.
If it is necessary to step on foreign toes to accomplish this mission-so be it.I am convinced that it is MUCH more important that the rest of the world respects us-at least enough that they won't dare to attack our civilians in our own homeland-than that they like us.We have dumped tremendous amounts of tax-payer money in foreign aid to all sorts of countries.Did they like us for this?Nope,just seems to make them resent us all the more.We have acted as the backbone with both money and troops for the UN but they aren't willing to stand with us when we're attacked.

We gotta do what we gotta do in order to survive.If the rest of the world don't like it...fuggum!

[MORTARDUDE]

Natalie :

We have willingly distributed "weapons of mass destruction" ( however you define the term ), to whoever was our "ally" at that moment. We helped supply the gas that killed the Iranians and the Kurds in the 1980s when Saddam was our friend. This is all a very lame subject wih me. And if we pursue it to its logical conclusion into Iran and Syria, it will destroy our military. just IMHO...

My 3,000 post !!!

Larry

[HARDCORE]

DOC -

"Beautifully Put!!"

VERITAS INDEED