Iranian leader ..Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

[GaryC 7]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

[GaryC 7]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

Unfortunately I think that unilateral action has made us less safe.

[LondonGooner 0]

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

You'll sing a different tune when we are faced with a coalition willing to act against us. I don't see America acting as a "World Policeman" but instead I see the United States taking on the role of a vigilante.

[Ban Hammer 14,675]

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

You'll sing a different tune when we are faced with a coalition willing to act against us. I don't see America acting as a "World Policeman" but instead I see the United States taking on the role of a vigilante.

led by who? france? i'm worried!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

...and other countries don't??? I'm confused on your logic. How do you determine what country should or shouldn't have nuclear weapons and as I pointed out - Pakistan has them, so does China, Russia. I don't see how we are going to stop countries from nuclear armament outside of diplomacy through international treaties.

[LondonGooner 0]

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

You'll sing a different tune when we are faced with a coalition willing to act against us. I don't see America acting as a "World Policeman" but instead I see the United States taking on the role of a vigilante.

led by who? france? i'm worried!

Such a coalition does not have to involve nation-states. Imagine Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades, the PLO, Fatah, etc, etc... putting their differences aside and uniting in their common hatred of all things Western and in particular American.

[almaty 19]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

...and other countries don't??? I'm confused on your logic. How do you determine what country should or shouldn't have nuclear weapons and as I pointed out - Pakistan has them, so does China, Russia. I don't see how we are going to stop countries from nuclear armament outside of diplomacy through international treaties.

yes..and so does north korea..

[Dan J 277]

Gary, what is the global policy on nuclear armament and who is responsible for dictating that policy? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a dictator - he happens to be our ally right now, but nevertheless, he's a dictator. What happens if he's removed from power?

If that happens then we need to deal with it.

Deal with it? Who are we to decide who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't if you believe in the autonomy of nations? To assume that we have the right or responsibility to be the world's police, who gave us that authority? Because we have the most nuclear weapons?

We have the right to protect ourselves. If a country developed nuclear weapons and might use them on us or our allies then we can and should take them out. I do not believe in the power of the UN or the international community to have our best interests at heart. I am all for us acting unilaterally and to hell with anyone that does not like it.

...and other countries don't??? I'm confused on your logic. How do you determine what country should or shouldn't have nuclear weapons and as I pointed out - Pakistan has them, so does China, Russia. I don't see how we are going to stop countries from nuclear armament outside of diplomacy through international treaties.

Not to mention, threat of military attack is quite a good reason to start building nukes.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Such a coalition does not have to involve nation-states. Imagine Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades, the PLO, Fatah, etc, etc... putting their differences aside and uniting in their common hatred of all things Western and in particular American.

Uh huh Palestinian militant groups and even Palestinian political parties are well-known members of the diabolical Islamic conspiracy to take over the world and destroy Western life as we know it.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Such a coalition does not have to involve nation-states. Imagine Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades, the PLO, Fatah, etc, etc... putting their differences aside and uniting in their common hatred of all things Western and in particular American.

Uh huh Palestinian militant groups and even Palestinian political parties are well-known members of the diabolical Islamic conspiracy to take over the world and destroy Western life as we know it.

Naw.... they're happy just with killing Jews..... for now.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Naw.... they're happy just with killing Jews..... for now.

And Jews are killing Muslims (and Christians.)

But the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not about religion... it's about real estate.

[GaryC 7]

Now.... they're happy just with killing Jews..... for now.

And Jews are killing Muslims (and Christians.)

But the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not about religion... it's about real estate.

The radical Islam terrorists don't really care about the Palestinians. They are just using them as an excuse to spread their evil. They are nothing but pawns and an excuse.

Edited September 26, 2007 by GaryC