why still some countries(USA,UK,FRANCE,...),insist to have nuclear weapons,and do not allow others to do so.?
96831
Because the nations who are allowed to have them will only use them for defense(for themselves or  other, weaker countries) and China, Iran, Iraq, etc. are aggressive towards other nations. \nFor those of you who are going to argue that the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, we didn't do it to conquer and rule them. We invaded because they were ruled by evil, dangerous dictaters comperable to Hitler in their cruelty and threat to all civilized countries. And, even though we did attack them, we didn't use nukes. In short, we can be trusted with them, and the others can't.
719251
Those with active Nuclear Weapons programs:\nUSA, Russia, China, UK, France, India, Pakistan, Israel\n\nThose without, but who could produce them if desired:\nGermany, Holland, Brazil, Japan, Australia, Canada, Spain, Poland, Hungary, Turkmenestan, Siberia.\n\nThose who may or may not have:\nNorth Korea\n\nIn addition, Iran is trying very hard to acquire the technology to create its own nuclear weapons.
48208
becausev it would take away from the U,s, status as the only super power . the us wouldnt be the baddest kid on the block if other countries also had these kinds of weapons .
342284
Iran is a member of the United Nations and a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and is not suppose to be developing nuclear weapons.  Although Iran has been stating that they only want peace use of atomic energy, their position is highly suspect, if for no other reason than the fact that Russia offered to provide the atomic fuel they needed for such peaceful use and Iran turned that offer down.  \n\nBeyond that reality, no nation with nuclear weapons wants such weapons to spread to other countries.  This is particularly true of countries that have unstable and radical governments.  It isn’t a matter of a country’s right to tell them they can’t have such weapons, but a matter of realistic defense.
469756
Some say we have no respect for life.  And we have nukes.  Everyone gets all worried when a new country gets nukes.  Sadly, the power a country obtains by having a nuke (USA!) makes it a desirable goal for countries.  We were just as afraid of pakistan and india having nukes, but now that they have nukes we 'work' with them.  We won't negotiate or lift sanctions with/on North Korea, but if they get nukes, we'd meet them as equals instead.  So you see, the United States created this 'everyone wants nukes' problem.  I'm sure the rest of the world isn't so sure we're completely trustworthy and capable of having them, just as we're afraid of other countries having them.  You'd think the solution would be to eliminate nukes.  Sadly, that's impossible because then some other country would get them and they'd be the super power like the USA.  And then we'd be on the short end of the stick internationally.  Basically, we'd be screwed.  It's a no-win situation.
641473
The World Wars are over.  Any country with enough military firepower to wage a global-scale war has sense enough to realize that those conflicts will escalate to nuclear conflicts with unacceptable consequences for all concerned.
40761
Is this a question, or a US bashing, I'm not sure. I often ask myself that same question though. The most honest answer might be because we can control our technology, and we have the power to control proliferation too because we see it as a danger. In general, it's probobly not a good idea for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to have Atom bombs. Do you really think nothing bad would happen if every country had enough bombs to destroy the planet? Yea that would be swell. \n\nI do have to admit there is a certain irony to the United States being so controling about nukes. We say we can't trust others to have them, but who's the ONLY county crazy enough in the history of the world to actually use one... Yep.
352350
We would simply all be screwed.\n\nHoping that Nuclear war doesn't happen, US would probably be in an alliance with Brittan, France, Russia, Germany vs. some new threat, like the Middle East (I MEAN NO OFFENCE TO ANY OF MIDDLE EASTERN DESCENT OR OF THOSE IN THE MIDDLE EAST, I MEAN IT SIMPLY AS AN EXAMPLE. An example of a region who has slightly different views, and is not completely out of the running.)
588767
We have more WMD's than you, so if you try to defy us, you go BOOM. \n\nThat sounds stupid because of the way I phrased it, but it's true. We own the world with fear (which is known as TERRORISM). Russia has almost as many WMD's as we do though, so we're unable to push them around. Same with North Korea, since they have an alliance with North Korea. Thus, situations such as the 'Cold War' (I'm sure you've heard of it) arise.\n\nBut that doesn't stop the foreign policy makers in the US. Ohhhh no...the threat of nuclear holocaust never stopped us....*shakes head*
344032
I would answer you by a similar answer; can anyone beside me see why USA and Israel give themselves the whole right to posses nuclear weapons and prevent others from have them? And just a small reminder; USA is the unique nation over the whole history which has used the nuclear weapons and it has committed the biggest and most aggressive genocide  against hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan at the end of World War II (in spite of the fact that Japan had announced its surrendering before USA committed its crime which give no justified moral excuses). It was only the desire of showing off, arrogance and terrorizing other nations.
18062
Yes, and it's actually really digusting, the amount of nuclear explosives we have. What I don't understand is why is the U.S. trying to keep other countries from having them, yet it is perfectly alright for us to have them claiming "protection"?
603744
And so does the UK and South Africa.\n\nThe good thing is that in the last 50 years no-=one has used them, but that will all change if a lunatic who is not afraid of retaliation gets the bomb.\n\nIran and North Korea come to mind.\n\nWhen you have nothing but an unshakeable belief in your religion or system its easy to start a war.
566166
Wrong Buddy. Remember you have some crazy people who will do anything to get a nuke in their hands. Anyone from terrorists, to warlords. The civilized world, notice like the US, France, Britain, and so forth, use their nukes as a deterrent. You know u nuke me, I'll nuke you back. Crazy countries like Iran just wants nukes to WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!! So therefore, it is in the best interest of the civilized world that certain countries contain and hold nukes.
38699
A country like Iran that has pursued nuclear weapons and long-range rockets and has vowed to destroy a Democracy (Israel) should not be trusted, noteven with materials that could be used to further their nefarious aims.  Would they even hesitate to supply such weapons to terriorists?  Do you want to take that chance?  Just having nuclear WMD would allow them to intimidate their neighbors.  No one would dare try to stop them from equipping even more suicide bombers or organizing the powers on earth that have no regard for innocent human life, including yours.
58644
We all know that some countries (Iran, North Korea, etc.) that just can't be trusted with them. We know that the US or France won't just drop a nuke on someone because someone insulted Mohammed.
668472
The countries in question, Iran, NK, (not necessarily India) have been pretty vocal about what they'd do with nukes.  It's sort of like how if you're parents smoke and they tell you not to smoke when you're in high school, and you're like, "Yo, you smoke."  \n\nBut there's a difference between parents and teens, just like there are differences now between those who have and don't have nukes-- the biggest of which includes a little discretion and little less ambition to come up.  Double standards can't be criticized-- it's the way $h!t is.  There are no black and white scenarios, especially when discussing politics.  If there's black and white, that means there's grey in between, and some motherf--ker is always gonna exploit that $h!t while the rest of us try to maintain integrity by not participating in double standards, you know?\n\nI'm claiming a single standard is impractical.  A Smith & Wesson beats four aces-- and we're holding that $h!t now.
723494
It is because America used nuclear weapons and everyone realized the devestation that people are reluctant to use them.\n\nIt is the same reason chemical and germ warfare are considered as evil.  Both sides used it in WW I.  Why don't we take those weapons away from the Europeans, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Iraqi's and Iranians, just to name a few.