I said Iraq did not have nuclear weapons. Please do not misquote me.
okay, in my understanding I was not mis-quoting:
as not a Nuclear-scientist, in my limited understanding, whether you use a "
nuclear weapon", or
another "weapon of
mass-destruction", they do the
same thing:
kill exceeding numbers of people.
North Korea has had nuclear weapons since 2006 and
no president since Truman has done much about their danger.
tho NK had them since 2006, they couldn't get them delivered,
so is that why Bush didn't do anything about them? - But
now they have advanced their technology, so
that is why
I asked Why? hasn't Obama disabled their Destructive intents.
That is an okay question to ask, yes?
Libya doesn't have nuclear weapons, is what I said. Please do not misquote me.
Again, in my understanding I was not mis-quoting:
as not a Nuclear-scientist, in my limited understanding, whether you use a "
nuclear weapon", or
another "weapon of
mass-destruction", they do the
same thing:
kill exceeding numbers of people.
I think
it is appropriate for Iran to want nuclear weapons under the circumstances of how countries are treated with and without them.
Nuclear weapons are never appropriate for use.
Thank goodness !, you agree they should Not be used.
Except as a
deterrent against an enemy bent on
annihilating other people, as their entire country.
This is a thread about American foreign policy.
If you want to judge me find something better.
Thank you for starting that premise/assumption, with
IF.
Because what I had in mind actually was
gaining greater understanding.
so your judgment is confusing
Are you saying -
it's not okay?
to ask someone questions, to have them further explain themselves, and to have
Dialogue in the hope that maybe greater understanding can be gained?
.
