Nuclear weapons: A right?

[hobie]

---

To have nuclear power, it's a right.
To have a nuclear weapon, it's a privilege.

[vp-rakista]

peace on earth... wala naman tingale kinahanglana ang nuclear weapons? kuyaw kung every nation has it kay kung naa teritorrial dispute wala na lalis, sa makauna lang palupad nuclear missile... ganahan ta ana?

sakto ra na US and Russia lang ang naa ana, kung kinsa to nasod ganahan mogamit pahuwamon lang ahehehe

[romano2717]

imagine this one happening in your backyard.

[chan888]

ka delicado aning nuclear...

[bodie]

to own a nuclear weapon is like owning a gun. you own a gun to feel safe but your chances of actually using it is very slim. so the argument as to whether countries should have the right to own nuclear weapons, is the same argument as to whether citizens of a country should be permitted to carry guns.

this should be an on-going debate. 50-50 ko ani.

A really really big gun that has the potential to kill a lot of people, but my point exactly.

[bodie]

nuclear power must be controlled.. so some have the priviledge some dont.. so its not really a right... the majority f the states must see one state as not a threat to the whole world so the community of state allow you to have your own.. but states such as North Korea is a threat to the world.. they dont follow world orders nor agreement para silang renegade state... their leader is impossible...

would you give a gun to an insane person?

And, why should they follow orders anyway? Self determination man kaha.

[grovestreet]

the question should be, how were they able to obtain nuclear weapons? who financed it?

mura ug sa salida nga "The international" ba hehe... maybe i'm watching too many movies.

if you have sources for the information i'm looking for. please enlighten me. hehe

[eax]

Mao bitaw nabuhat na ang IANEA to have safeguards katong naay mga nuclear arsenals.

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

And, why should they follow orders anyway? Self determination man kaha.

world orders... in the international politics generally there is no law to maintain peace and order between states... so its actually chaotic or in anarchy because every state independent from each other and have the "right" to assimilate other state to spread its sphere of influence, or its territory.

technically we have the right as part of self determination to enlarge our territory and so are the other states... but that will only result to more chaos and more wars...that is why states have world orders and international regimes and treaties and agreements.. to maintain peace... and stability

in IR there many concept on maintaing peace... base on polarity of power (bipolar or hedgemoni like US as world police or Super power), or interdependence and other...

In my opinion many still see US as a super power and world police so they have nuclear power thats ok with the rest of the world... with Russia duirng the cold war there was bipolarity of power.. but even with that bipolarity of power still there was stability...

now we have other states with other nuclear power but many of them are allies of the US... or it could also be explained by multi-polarity but still stability in Internatinal Poltics is still achived

on the other had we have interdependece theory, which explain alot about intenational poltics and the existence of each states inrelation to other states...

North Korea is a renegade state that dont think of international orders and the interdependence of state,it has no idea of the effect of a war to the whole world and how devastating it could be for the rest...

[leonell]

Question................ is the Phils protected from nuke attacks by the USA? I mean missile defense umbrella kunuhay.

No problem man ang Japan ky they can defend their selves naman. Well how would Japan be a Major World Power if it couldn't protect itself from nukes, I mean most Global Powers like UK for example has a missile defense program.