[extropy-chat] nuclear non-proliferation as energy strategy ?

[Herb Martin]

> From: Samantha Atkins
> 
> We slap a label on a country and expect the normal rules not to  
> apply.  Very neat.  A much scarier country that already has nukes is  
> Pakistan.   But they are our good buds.  Israel is a major  
> international outlaw by the number and scope of UN resolutions they  
> have violated but they have had nukes since at least the sixties and  
> are one of the most heavily militarized countries per capita on the  
> planet.  

The above is either sophomoric or dishonest
since Israel is NOT a frequent violator of
BINDING UN resolutions, nor a signatory to the
NPT

The petty dictatorships that make up the bulk
of the UN member states can vote anything they
please, sensible or not, but all of that is
NON-BINDING on member nations.

The Israelis are militarized because ALL of their
neighbors (and secondary neighbors) want to,
or have wanted to, throw them into the sea or
MURDER them.

Iran has signed nuclear non-proliferation agreements
benefited from those agreements.

Pakistan and India, along with Israel have always
refused to sign.

It would have been better had both Pakistan and
India been PREVENTED from developing and deploying
such weapons but the opportunity to do so was
lost due to Cold War concerns between the US and
the USSR (and to some extent PRC.)

And remember that "mobilization" has long been 
considered an act of war -- development of nuclear
weapons by a state which did not have them can
certainly be considered to constitute mobilization.

Bottom line:  Iran and North Korea cannot be trusted
with nuclear weapons and if they can be removed they
should be removed.

Funny that largely the same people that would allow
nuclear weapons to such states are typically the
same people that would argue against the individual
right of human beings to keep and bear arms.

--
Herb Martin