Oct 7, 2015 -- 12:25PM, Pounf wrote:
The party of the "fair chance"
Dec 4, 2015 -- 9:06PM, cryoftruth wrote:
AkabulaNot sure about that bula, even though I am sure you are as cute in looks as the way you write.The trouble with the argument that we and other countries are safer with the possession of nukes is that if it applies to us, it must logically apply to other countries.Now I do not believe that Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, Latvia, Ukraine, Iceland, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Brazil or any other country would be "safer" with nukes. Nor do I believe that the rest of the world would be if loads more countries have nukes either.I don't think anyone sensibly believes that loads of countries being "protected" by possession of nukes is sensible. The deterrence argument is essentially rubbish.
You don't think Ukraine would have been safer with the nuclear arsenal it gave up?
Did you miss Russia annexing Crimea?