What gives the U.S. the authority to stop others from developing nuclear weapons?
534742
THE IDEA IS TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE HANDS OF COUNTRIES THAT ARE UNSTABLE.SOME COUNTRIES CHANGE LEADERSHIP FOUR X IN A TWO YEAR PERIOD.IF IRAQ HAS THEM WHO CONTROLS THEM ? SUNNIS KURDS. IT HAS TO STOP OR WE'LL BE IN W.W.III IN A HEARTBEAT.
97335
to exploit it in full.\nhow can they make it a safe place by using force and weapons is a way only americans know, or don't wanna know.
394066
Yes, absolutely.\n\nwhy it is permitted only to western countries & Israel to have nuclear energy or weapons, and not for any other coutry (specially if it was Muslim one)\n\nDo not tell me because we are terrorists-I expect some people to say that remember that America is the one and only country that used the nuclear Bomb.\n\nEach country has the right do its researchs, to have defensive tools agianst any potential threat.
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.
390471
What gives anyone the idea that the U.S. or anyone else has the right to dictate what another nation does within their own borders? So far Iran has not done anything to affect anyone outside their own borders.Are we going to assume they are building W.M.D.'s like we did to Iraq?Who says that they or any other nation has no right to posses W.M.D.'s or anything else? We have them,and we ARE using them to enforce our will outside our own borders.Should the rest of the world attack us?
622661
once a country gets the bomb, that is it. they have fully deterence against anyone including US. that is why it is important that we work diplomatically with the international community and not allow them to have it.
306260
i think they do. considering I'm from around there. look, if the U.S says that they shouldn't get Nuclear Bombs,that is being wrong because you are denying somebody something that you already have, and that's just....whatever.
478733
Yep. If one nation posseses nuclear weapons, what gives it the right to forbid nuclear weapons to other nations? Dont get me wrong, I dont approve of any nuclear weapons at all, but if the Iranians want them, then its their right.\n\n\npeace
592707
Of course there is no ight or wrong answer to this question, but I don't think that evaluation is right. Particularly in this nuclear imbalanced world created by NNPT, a country like USA that holds atomic weapons can easily defeat another country that does not have nuclear weapons (though I can't think of any country militarily strong enough that USA won't attack without nuclear weapons yet has no nuclear weapon itself). The presence of nuclear weapons can also radically affect the course of war between two nuclear countries. For example, France is militarily weaker than USA but USA may well think twice before attacking France because just before falling a desparate government may well decide to fire off those warheads.
638207
None.\n\nThe five Nuclear Powers.\n\nThe World should stop at 5 Nuclear Powers.\n\nThe nukes may never go away.\n\nBut it helps to know there has not been a single nuclear attack against any country since Nagasaki 1945. That is more than 60 years ago.It would be safe to keep it that way.\n\nCan anyone guarantee the same if other countries(ANY) start developing nuclear weapons indiscriminately?
785162
nuclear non-proliferation act
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"?
261152
Yes, if they can manage a nuclear power plant safely. Even if we (the 'free' world) do not trust them, we are not the world's police and until the actually are a threat that we must defend against, then let em do what they want.
67954
There is a fine line between nuclear energy and nuclear WEAPONS.  Energy will benefit everyone greatly until a meltdown of course.  However researching nuclear energy and experimenting with it leads to some bad people having volitile materials which COULD BE used for a dirty bomb or full out nuclear weapon.  To answer the 2nd part of the question.. what do you THINK the US will do to stop them?  We will warn them once, ask the UN and get denied, then take matters into our own hands.  I vote move to Canada.
478985
The United States must abide by laws that govern such things as international trade and human rights.  The United States, as is with every other nation, is not required to abide by the edicts passed by the United Nations.  \n\nIf they elect not to abide by a law that it feels is unfair or against the United States' interests they can refuse to uphold that law.  The consequences could include cooled relationships with other countries, embargos and even U N sanctioned war.
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 .
678370
so that the person who figures it out cant use it in america and use their oown weapons against them