Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cthulu23
You might want to read my reply to Ustwo directly over your last post. I wasn't blaming Bush for the weapons programs, I was just mentioning a possible negative side to the Bush doctrine. Can you deny that what I said is a possibility? Or you guys could go on putting words in my mouth if that suits you.
|
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the Bush doctrine doesn't make countries develop nukes (that takes too long), but it might certainly encourage countries to increase the speed of their development in order to prevent any attacks. If so, I agree.
In the case of Iran and North-Korea, I doubt Bush is a very large factor, though. It's probably just an excuse - they've been developing them for years now (duh!), and wanted them anyway. Both countries are sworn enemies of the US, and what would be better than blaming the US...
Of course, if John Kerry comes to power, starts a massive world-wide peace movement, we'll see whether Iran and NK will stop developing nukes; somehow, I doubt that'll happen.
As another example, I'd like to point at Libya. Even though Bush doesn't like them one bit, they're not officially part of the axis of evil, and they stopped development of their nukes. Why are they different??? I'd say it's because Libya doesn't have any direct enemies, and doesn't *need* nukes.