If America is so keen to see an end to weapons of mass destruction why don't they start with their own?
406110
yes i strong agree America should end the M.W.D first and the rest of the world will follow.
569088
No and quite frankly why should anyone help the Americans to solve this problem. The civilised world was screaming at them not to invade Iraq, but no America knows best. So really America should clean up this mess and finally realise that war is not just cruise missiles flying over the skies of Baghdad in a pyrotechnic display of shock and awe. \n\nAmerica was founded by a group of idealists that wanted to remove the shackles of imposed government. May be it is time that America returns back to it's founding fathers and reexamines it's gun ho attitude to the world. \n\nMay be she can realise that yes Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, but for a civilised world, there has to be alternative to war and bloodshed. Is that not why the UN was set up after the second world war to try and avoid the carnage being repeated?
567601
No Weapons of Mass Destruction. The use Depleted Uranium. The lack of rebuilding Iraq. Halliburton stealing untold billions of dollars. Bush's ties to Saudi Arabia where the terrorists came from. The fact that the price of oil has doubled and Bu$h's big oil ties rankle average Americans. The fact that the government either let 9-11 happen or was involved in the whole thing as a "New Pearl Harbour" event.\nLook up Project for a New American Century and New pearl Harbour and this search will open your eyes. The neo-conservatives who appear to be willing to let America self destruct rather than support America at home. \n\nThe fact that millions of illegal immigrants are flooding the United States and the National Guard is in Iraq. \n\nPre-Emptive wars. They are immoral.\n\nLook for another 9-11 like event blamed on Iran. Look for Russia to retaliate for any preemptive strike on Iran. America does not want to be involved in pre-emptive wars. The money is being pilfered by the ultra rich while the poor are becoming poorer. Wallstreet wins and the average American is losing. A trillion dollars worth of war time debt that America's children will have to pay for a war that was started from false information.\n\nChina is making moves and America is now heavily in debt to China. \n\nThere a many thousands of reasons why America does not want to be involved in foreign entanglements but the main reason is because war is wrong. Refuse to partipate in them. They have become nuclear battlefields with more radiation then hundreds of Hiroshima and Nagasaki A Bombs. \n\nPeace is Patriotic.
690844
I really don't have an answer to your question, but I think we could go along way toward world peace by disbanding the military and just building a purely defensive force. We could protect our borders better if we concentrated our resources on protection of our own country. Things like happened on 9/11 would not be able to happen. I also think that the money saved would be better spent on the American people in need. Health care being one of my biggest issues. That being said there are to many greedy repuglicans in this country to ever happen, but it is my dream world.
311108
No, I don't think America should do this. They must learn from their past experiences...(Vietnam, Iraq..). Its the war of OIL. and let me tell you that Iran is not Iraq or Vietnam, and America knows it very well.\nAnd why the hell Americans love to be the global POLICE. They have everything with them(Nuclear weapons), but nobody else could have it. What is this non sense.
1179731
Not necessarily. The U.S. or any other countries don't use theirs. If they are "used," per se, it is as a deterrent for other countries using nuclear weapons.
6492
You would never be able to stop the sale of arms between 2 countries even with a Prime Directive. Look at all the gun laws we have in America and criminals STILL have guns. Liberals think if they could only pass just one more gun law maybe this time it would be different.(Isn't that the definition of insanity - do the same thing over and over hoping for a different result?)\n\nDidn't you see Star Trek V? Remeber the planet of Galactic Peace? Weapons were OUTLAWED on that planet and they STILL HAD WEAPONS.\n\nOurs is a planet governed by the threat of the use of force - people won't challenge us unless they see weakness (Like when Clinton was running the country and caused Black Hawk Down to happen because he cut and ran in Somalia) The best course of action is to have the strongest national defense system possible and then pray to a higher power that we never have to use it...ever.
408299
Yes. They should continue it, despite US "Aggression"\n\nIt is not right for the US to dictate who can have nuclear technology in the world...especially when they are the only ones to have ever used nuclear weapons on people.
812863
lol...i think they will do that.... call every body else as "Terrorist"\n\notherwise they would have destroyed their nuke first.....they just want to keep their nukes and restrained others not to keep them..by saying....."deadliest weapon ...we are still sad after using on Japan twice........ (bull*s*hit)........Just to keep hold on others..
723494
It is because America used nuclear weapons and everyone realized the devestation that people are reluctant to use them.\n\nIt is the same reason chemical and germ warfare are considered as evil.  Both sides used it in WW I.  Why don't we take those weapons away from the Europeans, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Iraqi's and Iranians, just to name a few.
1119142
No. We should allow a hostile country to develop any weapon they want, so they can attack us later on. Then we can sit back and bitch and moan about how Bush screwed it up. We should wait for the inneffectual UN to pass 20+ resolutions over the next 10-20 years. Then once they have the bomb and have attacked us we can be blamed for it, and rebuild their country better than it was before. All while they burn our flag and chant, "Death to America."
323620
I am thinking that we should stop being racist and arrogant.\nI am also thinking that we are not in charge of the universe.\nI am also thinking that if we have the right to have nuclear arms so should they.\n\nAfter all, we are not better than anyone else.\nAfter all, Iran is far less dangerous than the US ehich already has its own nuclear weapons.\n\nIn the last 50 years Iran has attacked exactly zero countries. In fact, through US enccouragement it was attacked by our former clients, the Iraqis.\nThe US has attacked Iraq, Vietnam, Guatemala, Grenada, Korea, El Salvador, Cuba, Panama, Egypt, and the list goes on.\n\nMaybe we should get rid of our own nuclear weapons before we ask others to do. We dont want to be hypocrites, right?\n\nBy the way, Iranians have never claimed or said they are developing nuclear weapons. Only the US has made this claim. And I sure beleive what W and Cheney say, right? ;-)
29745
Right now they hate the United States and there starting to get Nuclear Weapons. i think there Terriosts about to get us and were are not doing any thing. that what i think.
491884
Perhaps you were lost somewhere in recent history, but the Cold War ended for a reason. \n\nThere is no reason to consider the use of nuclear weapons on Iran. Look at Iraq. How can you possibly trust the intelligence the Bush Administration would rely on in order to initiate a pre-emptive nuclear strike? \n\nThe US can no longer use might and must learn again how to use diplomacy. This is not a democrat vs. republican issue. This is an issue that involves all of humanity.\n\nUse of nuclear weapons is harmful to everyone, not just the country or entity on which the weapons are used. Look at what the US did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the lasting impact it has had on the environment and the people of Japan. The US should be ashamed of testing nuclear weapons in that way!!\n\nAnyone still advocating the use of nuclear weapons needs to read up on diplomatic strategy and look at the inevitability of the fall of the US empire as well as global warming, cancer statistics among survivors and countless other issues. Nuclear weapons are even harmful for the US to store. \n\nSoon the US will no longer be in control in the world forum, as hard to believe as that is, the writing is on the wall.
962933
Considering that nations that officially have nuclear weapons have tested them within their own borders, and sometimes even deliberately on their own people... I see absolutely no reason why they couldn't use them internally in self defense.\n\nTo some extent, this goes back to the creation of the tactical nuclear strategy developed by the US, as a member of NATO, to defend Western Europe during the cold war.\n\nAs the Warsaw Pact (dominated by the Soviet Union, USSR) had overwhelming strength in troops, armor and aircraft, a nuclear counter strategy was developed.\n\nThis was dependent on tactical (rather than strategic) nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons that could be fired out of howitzers were developed, the theory being that you could blast the bad guys, and the good guys would win.\n\nSo the use of nuclear weapons to stop an invasion not only has intrinsic logical precedent, any means necessary, as well as the technology to make it less than internally lethal.\n\n-dh\n\nScary thought though...
20185
Only if we're hit first, then there will be no choice. Getting nuked and not sending one back would send the wrong message to other nuclear armed countries.
611542
difficult question, because although i agree with the sentiment that America has them, and has used them.. they have also bore witness to them. they know the nuclear power, have been humbled by it and its power and there are people in the government that wont let it be used to whimsically again.\n\nIran on the other hand, feel oppressed, hard done by even internationally. they are angry and you know what they say in cartoons about deadly weapons being in the wrong hands?!\n\ni just think we have seen in the past (Vietnam) and present - examples of countries that the USA would've used this destructive power against, but haven't. Would Iran be so self controlling when vying for 'respect'? would they use it as a tool of persuasion?\n\nI personally feel alittle uncomfortable that a country that has so many people baying for western blood could posses such a weapon (i mean, isn't it technically our governments that are at war?)\n\nSo even though I'm not happy that America See's its self as the worlds police force (shouldn't that be the UN?), i think it is a case of 'Better the Devil you Know'.