8 ms·

> Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. It's an intolerable premise Actions have consequences. The continual attack on the sovereignty of countries around the worl

> Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. It's an intolerable premise Actions have consequences. The continual attack on the sovereignty of countries around the world has made nuclear weapons one of the few ways to avoid being a client state of the US at the expense of your own population. Iran has figured out another method it seems. This is blowback. The simple lesson that we refuse to learn.

ericmay 5d ago
> The continual attack on the sovereignty of countries around the world has made nuclear weapons one of the few ways to Name the other countries pursuing a nuclear weapon. Maybe you are drumming up a fear that nobody else really has.
- mmooss 5d ago
  They don't announce their secret nuclear weapons programs before they are complete (though they are sometimes discovered), but some countries have violated international law and developed them, precisely to protect their sovereignty: - North Korea - Israel - India - Pakistan All retain their sovereignty, though I can't prove any causal effect and certainly nuclear weapons isn't the only cause. Others have pursued them, includng Libya, South Africa, etc. Libya agreed to surrender their program, and then their government was deposed with Western help. Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons (left over from being occupied by the USSR) in exchange for peace from Russia, and you can see what happened. That doesn't encourage the next person to give up theirs.
  - ericmay 5d ago
    India and Pakistan both rushed their programs back in the 40s/50s ( or maybe later I can't recall off the top of my head). Libya and South Africa were negotiated away. That leaves Israel probably from the, what, 70s or 80s? And North Korea was supported by Russia and China. I'm not sure you could consider any of those countries to be "pursuing nuclear weapons" today. Plus by that logic you'd have to throw in the US, UK, China, Soviets, and France too. So when you sort of set aside countries from prior to, idk, 1980s ish you don't really have anyone at least publicly (to your point) pursuing nuclear weapons. However it's not just the enrichment of uranium which is tightly controlled it's also the missile technology to deliver the weapons. Keeping a nuclear program secret these days I think is quite a bit more difficult than in the past. So when you look around today you've got Iran that we know of pursuing a nuclear program. I'm not sure anyone else is by virtue of how difficult (I think?) it would be to do so undetected. Though there are countries (Japan and Korea come to mind) who we think have the ability to scale up a program very quickly.
    - drTobiasFunke 5d ago
      India and Pakistan were late 90s. Japan and South Korea literally have 100s of American military bases on their territory. You really think they are sovereign nations who can pursue an independent nuclear program?
      - deleted 5d ago
        [deleted]
      - ericmay 5d ago
        > You really think they are sovereign nations who can pursue an independent nuclear program? Yes? Are you really sitting here telling South Korea, Japan, Germany, and more that they’re not sovereign nations because they choose to have American military bases on their home soil? > India and Pakistan were late 90s. Source please
    - mmooss 5d ago
      > India and Pakistan both rushed their programs back in the 40s/50s India worked on them on and off for decades and first tested one in 1998, and IIRC Pakistan matched them soon after. North Korea was in the 2000s. > So when you sort of set aside countries from prior to, idk, 1980s ish you don't really have anyone at least publicly (to your point) pursuing nuclear weapons. I'm not going through the comment correcting all of it.
      - ericmay 5d ago
        > I'm not going through the comment correcting all of it. Yea, why bother when you're peddling misinformation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiling_Buddha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiling_Buddha > North Korea was in the 2000s. Yes supported by Russia and China they got the keys they needed for the delivery mechanism (ballistic missiles). But the problem with North Korea is they threatened to kill hundreds of thousands of people in South Korea if anyone stopped them from building their bomb. South Korea didn't want that to happen and China would have fought against American forces had we tried anything in North Korea. Not much we can do.
  - nwellnhof 5d ago
    > Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons Ukraine never had nuclear weapons. Russia is the sole legal successor of the USSR and these were all Russian nukes on Ukrainian territory. > in exchange for peace from Russia There isn't a single mention of nuclear weapons in the Budapest Memorandum.
    - badc0ffee 5d ago
      > Ukraine never had nuclear weapons. Russia is the sole legal successor of the USSR and these were all Russian nukes on Ukrainian territory. Structuring the breakup so that the nukes are Russia's is not really different than Ukraine giving up the nukes on its territory. Where did they draw the line? Obviously not all USSR assets are now Russian assets, as Ukraine still has (or had) its own stockpile of Soviet era weapons, and other things like Soviet era airfields.
    - qlte 5d ago
      This is over simplified to the point of being misleading/wrong. Russia was the legal successor of the USSR for purposes of diplomatic continuity, but the other Soviet successor states divided portions of the Soviet military/equipment, split Soviet debt obligations, etc on a case by case basis.
      - ericmay 5d ago
        Nuclear weapons are a special case though. Plus Ukraine didn't have the ability to use them anyway without launch codes as far as I'm aware.
        goatlover 5d ago
        Electronic components can be swapped out. The nuclear material is what really matters.
        ericmay 5d ago
        The ability to fire the weapon matters too. You need a delivery mechanism.
  - riffraff 5d ago
    I believe Israel also didn't announce they have nukes, it's just mostly assumed they do.
- drTobiasFunke 5d ago
  There is no large country left which is not an American client state to pursue nuclear weapons . India was in the 90s, and they pursued nukes, tested them and got sanctioned by the west.
  - ericmay 5d ago
    How are you defining large? Geography? Population? Certainly you've got countries like Brazil or South Africa or Indonesia. I'm sure we could think of a few more.

ericmay 5d ago

> The continual attack on the sovereignty of countries around the world has made nuclear weapons one of the few ways to Name the other countries pursuing a nuclear weapon. Maybe you are drumming up a fear that nobody else really has.

mmooss 5d ago
They don't announce their secret nuclear weapons programs before they are complete (though they are sometimes discovered), but some countries have violated international law and developed them, precisely to protect their sovereignty: - North Korea - Israel - India - Pakistan All retain their sovereignty, though I can't prove any causal effect and certainly nuclear weapons isn't the only cause. Others have pursued them, includng Libya, South Africa, etc. Libya agreed to surrender their program, and then their government was deposed with Western help. Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons (left over from being occupied by the USSR) in exchange for peace from Russia, and you can see what happened. That doesn't encourage the next person to give up theirs.
- ericmay 5d ago
  India and Pakistan both rushed their programs back in the 40s/50s ( or maybe later I can't recall off the top of my head). Libya and South Africa were negotiated away. That leaves Israel probably from the, what, 70s or 80s? And North Korea was supported by Russia and China. I'm not sure you could consider any of those countries to be "pursuing nuclear weapons" today. Plus by that logic you'd have to throw in the US, UK, China, Soviets, and France too. So when you sort of set aside countries from prior to, idk, 1980s ish you don't really have anyone at least publicly (to your point) pursuing nuclear weapons. However it's not just the enrichment of uranium which is tightly controlled it's also the missile technology to deliver the weapons. Keeping a nuclear program secret these days I think is quite a bit more difficult than in the past. So when you look around today you've got Iran that we know of pursuing a nuclear program. I'm not sure anyone else is by virtue of how difficult (I think?) it would be to do so undetected. Though there are countries (Japan and Korea come to mind) who we think have the ability to scale up a program very quickly.
  - drTobiasFunke 5d ago
    India and Pakistan were late 90s. Japan and South Korea literally have 100s of American military bases on their territory. You really think they are sovereign nations who can pursue an independent nuclear program?
    - deleted 5d ago
      [deleted]
    - ericmay 5d ago
      > You really think they are sovereign nations who can pursue an independent nuclear program? Yes? Are you really sitting here telling South Korea, Japan, Germany, and more that they’re not sovereign nations because they choose to have American military bases on their home soil? > India and Pakistan were late 90s. Source please
  - mmooss 5d ago
    > India and Pakistan both rushed their programs back in the 40s/50s India worked on them on and off for decades and first tested one in 1998, and IIRC Pakistan matched them soon after. North Korea was in the 2000s. > So when you sort of set aside countries from prior to, idk, 1980s ish you don't really have anyone at least publicly (to your point) pursuing nuclear weapons. I'm not going through the comment correcting all of it.
    - ericmay 5d ago
      > I'm not going through the comment correcting all of it. Yea, why bother when you're peddling misinformation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiling_Buddha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiling_Buddha > North Korea was in the 2000s. Yes supported by Russia and China they got the keys they needed for the delivery mechanism (ballistic missiles). But the problem with North Korea is they threatened to kill hundreds of thousands of people in South Korea if anyone stopped them from building their bomb. South Korea didn't want that to happen and China would have fought against American forces had we tried anything in North Korea. Not much we can do.
- nwellnhof 5d ago
  > Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons Ukraine never had nuclear weapons. Russia is the sole legal successor of the USSR and these were all Russian nukes on Ukrainian territory. > in exchange for peace from Russia There isn't a single mention of nuclear weapons in the Budapest Memorandum.
  - badc0ffee 5d ago
    > Ukraine never had nuclear weapons. Russia is the sole legal successor of the USSR and these were all Russian nukes on Ukrainian territory. Structuring the breakup so that the nukes are Russia's is not really different than Ukraine giving up the nukes on its territory. Where did they draw the line? Obviously not all USSR assets are now Russian assets, as Ukraine still has (or had) its own stockpile of Soviet era weapons, and other things like Soviet era airfields.
  - qlte 5d ago
    This is over simplified to the point of being misleading/wrong. Russia was the legal successor of the USSR for purposes of diplomatic continuity, but the other Soviet successor states divided portions of the Soviet military/equipment, split Soviet debt obligations, etc on a case by case basis.
    - ericmay 5d ago
      Nuclear weapons are a special case though. Plus Ukraine didn't have the ability to use them anyway without launch codes as far as I'm aware.
      - goatlover 5d ago
        Electronic components can be swapped out. The nuclear material is what really matters.
        ericmay 5d ago
        The ability to fire the weapon matters too. You need a delivery mechanism.
- riffraff 5d ago
  I believe Israel also didn't announce they have nukes, it's just mostly assumed they do.
drTobiasFunke 5d ago
There is no large country left which is not an American client state to pursue nuclear weapons . India was in the 90s, and they pursued nukes, tested them and got sanctioned by the west.
- ericmay 5d ago
  How are you defining large? Geography? Population? Certainly you've got countries like Brazil or South Africa or Indonesia. I'm sure we could think of a few more.