1/13    Another stupid question. Why exactly is Iraq not allowed to have
        these "weapons of mass destruction"? America and many other
        countries possess them, so why cannot Iraq?
          \- better question: why is France on the Security Council --psb
        \_ better question: why is France on the Security Council --psb
           \_ On the winning side of WWII and gave the capitalists numerical
              superiority over the communists. Not that having more really
              counted for much.
           \_ It was the only way to make shutup Charles de Galle.
              \- if you really want to hate france, you should read
                 more about de gaulle's thumbing his nose at churchill
                 and fdr. i dont have a good reference for this but if
                 someone else does, i'd be interested. ok tnx --psb
           \_ topWorldEconomies - countriesThatLostWWII = securityCouncil
              \_ ignorance + you = your post. Russia is not a topWorldEconomy.
                 \_ Who else then?  Cananda?  Harharharharhar!
                    \_ India... Brazil...
        \_ They entered into a legal arragement at the end of the gulf war
           where they stated they would not develop nuclear weapons.  They
           agreed because Saddam wanted to stay in power, but now he's
           violated that contract with the UN according to the chimp
           in the whitehouse.
        \_ ... as the world goes, is only in question between
           equals in power, while the strong do what they can
           and the weak suffer what they must ... [men] by a
           necessary law of their nature they rule wherever
           they can. And it is not as if we were the first to
           make this law, or to act upon it when made: we found
           it existing before us, and shall leave it to exist
           for ever after us; all we do is to make use of it,
           knowing that you and everybody else, having the
           same power as we have, would do the same as we do.
           --History of the Peloponnesian War, Book V  ("The Melian Dialog")
           \- "in our lifetime" i think a few more countries are likely
              to get nukes to make a run at it. iran, japan for example.
              --psb
              \- BTW, this may be of some interest:
                       soda:/tmp/Mearsheimer-Walt.pdf
                 I think they are somewhat glib on a few things (then it
                 comes to the importence or non- of nukes) but otherwise
                 it is a fairly accesible and reasonable article. --psb
                 \_ That's a good one though it is glib on points as you
                    say. It nicely outlines, by no specific mention,
                    "so why IS this little cabal so bent on aggressive
                    military action since they seem smart enough to know
                    better?". Anatol Lieven's article in the London Review
                    of Books is the only one I've seen to answer that in a
                    way that made sense. His article has also been prescient
                    given that it was published in October and, thus, likely
                    written in late August. -- ulysses
                    \- i think the the LRB article is leem, although the
                       "jewish problem" in american party politics was
                       kind of interesting. walt and mearsheimer's brains
                       are larger. you may wish to see the issue of IS
                       on this topic. IS is even better. --psb