actually, nobody should have nuclear bombs. nuclear bombs signify power. when one country "owns power," others get alarmed - they in turn find ways on how to get that much power so they could counter possible attacks from the more powerful countries (those who owns nuclear bombs).

Imbalance in power is one root cause of wars.

__________________
Vancouver escort -"the best that you’ll ever have."

You could make that same argument for any weapon.



You are aware that wars occurred before nukes were invented. Right?

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

You are aware that there have been fewer wars and fewer deaths from war since the invention of nuclear weapons. People don't want to get nuked, so they don't embark on massive wars of aggression.

__________________

"I am in favor of Free Trade"

--Karl Marx

Nukes are not the only relevant variable. Communications technology has matured over the same time frame. How did you determine that it was not responsible instead?

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Al-Qeada would never have taken assistance from Saddam. Bin Laden and his cronies have labeled him an infidel on many occasions. They also offered to help defend the Kurds those years back. These are people desperate enough in their beliefs to actually kill themselves for it. They would not in turn deny their beliefs to receive aid from someone they viewed just as evil as America.
I agree that debating whether or not we should have gone into Iraq is useless now.
I think we need to leave Iraq. I understand that things would be bad if we left now, but we have to look at this objectively. What hope do we ever have of settling the feud between the Shiites and the Sunnis? We are talking about a conflict that has stormed well over a thousand years. No third party will ever be able to mediate the two into peace. Especially not under the foot of a military occupation.
As for the original question of this thread. I disagree. Iran would never commit a nuclear strike against Israel. Not because they are timid, or because they are nice, but because they are not stupid. Doing so would be suicide, and they are quite aware of that. Would they use it for leverage against their neighbors? Oh you bet. Would they actually use it on a country so ‘adored’ by America it’s practically another state? Certainly not. Please, don’t confuse evil with stupid.
It would be nice if we could destroy the knowledge of nuclear weapons, but the genie is out of the bottle now, and we can’t put it back. While I shutter to think of Korea with such a weapon, we simply don’t have the right to force a nation to build or not build something.

Isn't that the oddest thing?

Nuclear weapons may be the saving grace of world wars. But also can end the world as we know it.

They could, if most people were really that stupid. The only chance there is for the end of the world by nuclear holocaust is if a nation of suicide bombers happened to come across a nuclear weapon, and we all know that that could never, ever happen. Right?

__________________

"I am in favor of Free Trade"

--Karl Marx

I don't think it is likely at all.

OOOhhhhh, but of coouurse.

And if it ever happened to happen, we could just nuke Iran off the face of the earth.

__________________

"I am in favor of Free Trade"

--Karl Marx

If Iran somehow nuked the United States sure.