What's new

A world with out nuclear weapons is not a joke?

NPT Review , the United States has successfully deflected the worldwide concerns about its national missile defence system. And the disarmament scenario remains as hazy as ever.
why India had chosen consistently to stay out of the NPT regime, "India is a nuclear weapons state. Though not a party to the NPT, India's policies have been consistent with the key pr ovisions of NPT that apply to nuclear weapons states. These provisions are contained in Articles I, III and VI. Article I obliges a nuclear weapons state not to transfer nuclear weapons to any other country or assist any other country to acquire them and India's record on non-proliferation has been impeccable. Article III requires a party to the Treaty to provide nuclear materials and related equipment to any other country only under safeguards; India's exports of such materials have always been under s afeguards. Article VI commits the parties to pursue negotiations to bring about eventual global nuclear disarmament. It needs to be emphasised that India today is the only nuclear weapon state that remains committed to commencing negotiations for a nucle ar weapons convention, in order to bring about a nuclear-weapon-free world, the very objective envisaged in Article VI of the NPT." India could never join the NPT as a non-NWS: "Statements by NP T States Parties about India rolling back its nuclear programme are mere diversions to prevent focussed attention on the basic goals of the NPT."

Disarmament obligations imposed under Article VI of the NPT constitute the most thorny problem. The U.S., as also the three other "western" NWSs - France, the U.K. and Russia - have insisted that the negotiations in "good faith" envisaged under Article V I have been making reasonable progress and will continue to do so. China has been the exception among the five NWSs, making common cause with the non-aligned and other nations in calling for an accelerated timetable for the elimination of nuclear weapons . Incidentally, China has a standpoint on security assurances too that puts it virtually in the ranks of the non-NWSs. It has consistently upheld its pledge that it would not even consider using nuclear weapons against a state that is not similarly armed and has urged other weapons states to follow its example.just see how EUROPE AND USA playing with world just to safe the israel to signature of npt.
 
well done No nuclear weapon after world war 3 .what about you? where will be you after thir world war TechMan FRESH .i hope you will be in USA or in USSR back yard lol.
 
well done No nuclear weapon after world war 3 .what about you? where will be you after thir world war TechMan FRESH .i hope you will be in USA or in USSR back yard lol.

Hey, cool down man. Fear (of survival) is a motivator bigger then greed (of trade).

What everybody need to ensure is that the balance is maintained. The very same Gen. Sunderji who, it is said wanted to provoke Pakistan into launching a preemptive attack on India has the following view about nukes. It is people who kill people, nukes are merely one more tool though.

"Possession of nuclear weapons would give Pakistan the confidence to face a larger neighbour with security and honor… This confidence on the part of Pakistan is to be welcomed as it is a positive asset for national sobriety and regional stability."
- General Krishnaswamy Sundarrajan, Indian Army

What is true here for Pakistan is true for every other country. The focus over absolute security is a western focus who are known to overdo things. Though even they are not idiots. They have maintained balance for so long, they would obviously not have any inclination for a denuclearised world.
 
1.It is as unrealistic to think of a world without nukes as it would be to think of a world without the likes of Bush. Both are scourge of the earth, but we have to live with both of them.

2. In the next decade the nuclear might add fol new members: Brazil, S Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Iran, Turkey, Egypt,S Africa,Ukraine, Germany, Italy and Australia. Argentina, Venezuela,Myanmar, Vietnam, Indonesia, S Arabia, Syria, Libya and Morocco would also try to acquire the technology which would neither be that expensive nor scarce by that time.
 
^what would be an interesting analysis to see how many wars took place before the advent of nukes (ca 1944 and earlier) and after (ca 1945) and the loss of life and destruction of property.
 
^^^ Its interesting that you compare the entire epochal history of human conflict to a mere 60+ odd years sir.

In terms of relevance and probably significance ..... the last similar epochal event was the invention of gunpowder.

Give it some time.

Weapons are like toys.

Kids are never happy to just look at them in their shiny gift wrapped state .....

First only one kid has the latest toy, and it is jealously guarded, and lusted after enviously .....

When (and not if) the other kids around have one, then one must naturally get one by hook or crook too .....

After a brief flirtation, kids lose interest, and hanker after the newer better improved version .....

And the cycle perpetuates itself .....

...... till there are kids around.

Cheers, Doc
 
Last edited:
1.It is as unrealistic to think of a world without nukes as it would be to think of a world without the likes of Bush. Both are scourge of the earth, but we have to live with both of them.

2. In the next decade the nuclear might add fol new members: Brazil, S Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Iran, Turkey, Egypt,S Africa,Ukraine, Germany, Italy and Australia. Argentina, Venezuela,Myanmar, Vietnam, Indonesia, S Arabia, Syria, Libya and Morocco would also try to acquire the technology which would neither be that expensive nor scarce by that time.

South Africa already has the technology and know how but voluntarily destroyed their nukes and signed up into the NPT in 1992. They just didn't see the need to be a nuclear armed state :cheers:
 
Think about your country without nuclear weapons. India not war pakistan recently due to simple thing and that thing is nuclear bomb. So in a way nuclear bomb is life line of country sir. Thank you.

india developed nuclear bomb earlier than pak.

2. In the next decade the nuclear might add fol new members: Brazil, S Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Iran, Turkey, Egypt,S Africa,Ukraine, Germany, Italy and Australia. Argentina, Venezuela,Myanmar, Vietnam, Indonesia, S Arabia, Syria, Libya and Morocco would also try to acquire the technology which would neither be that expensive nor scarce by that time.

what about bangladesh
 
^^^ Its interesting that you compare the entire epochal history of human conflict to a mere 60+ odd years sir.

In terms of relevance and probably significance ..... the last similar epochal event was the invention of gunpowder.

Give it some time.

Weapons are like toys.

Kids are never happy to just look at them in their shiny gift wrapped state .....

First only one kid has the latest toy, and it is jealously guarded, and lusted after enviously .....

When (and not if) the other kids around have one, then one must naturally get one by hook or crook too .....

After a brief flirtation, kids lose interest, and hanker after the newer better improved version .....

And the cycle perpetuates itself .....

...... till there are kids around.

Cheers, Doc

yes indeed!
my point is this that the concept of MAD assures to a great extent the avoidance of war between states (esp nuke-capable states) - US/USSR(now Russia) - NATO/Warsaw pact - and now Ind/Pak.
 
yes indeed!
my point is this that the concept of MAD assures to a great extent the avoidance of war between states (esp nuke-capable states) - US/USSR(now Russia) - NATO/Warsaw pact - and now Ind/Pak.

Again sir, the short timeframe of these impasses is what prevents that sick feeling in my stomach from completely vanishing (ovaryu and all that of course .....).

Yes, the spectre of MAD infuses some sanity, brings down temperatures, forces alternative thinking and scenarios, and keeps everyone well behaved.

That said, it also raises the possibility of annhilation should something happen to burst through all of the above, bringing down in one fell swoop all that such MAD dterrence was trying to deter in the first place.

Its a crappy situation to be in any which way you look at it.

Much like the impact of AIDS on free sex and the use of condoms.

Cheers, Doc
 
Again sir, the short timeframe of these impasses is what prevents that sick feeling in my stomach from completely vanishing (ovaryu and all that of course .....).

Yes, the spectre of MAD infuses some sanity, brings down temperatures, forces alternative thinking and scenarios, and keeps everyone well behaved.

That said, it also raises the possibility of annhilation should something happen to burst through all of the above, bringing down in one fell swoop all that such MAD dterrence was trying to deter in the first place.

Its a crappy situation to be in any which way you look at it.

Much like the impact of AIDS on free sex and the use of condoms.


Cheers, Doc

never saw it that way, esp discussing nukes :rofl:i guess in both cases you are history.
 
india developed nuclear bomb earlier than pak.



what about bangladesh

1. PAEC's ground work was done by Bengalee scientists. Bangladesh has the necessary technicians / man power / scientists to acquire nuclear weapons. In fact a CIA study shows Bangladesh can become nuclear in a year.
2. However, the reality is that Bangladesh is even unable to construct a much needed nuclear reactor to alleviate its power sector. She is under constant external pressure to remain non-nuclear.
3. Never-the-less, the surrounding /regional powers - China, India, Pakistan and USA are nuclear. Myanmar is planning to be one. Therefore, it will be sensible for Bangladesh to come under the nuclear umbrella of an ally.
 
1. PAEC's ground work was done by Bengalee scientists. Bangladesh has the necessary technicians / man power / scientists to acquire nuclear weapons. In fact a CIA study shows Bangladesh can become nuclear in a year.

:rofl::rofl:
 
1. PAEC's ground work was done by Bengalee scientists. Bangladesh has the necessary technicians / man power / scientists to acquire nuclear weapons. In fact a CIA study shows Bangladesh can become nuclear in a year.
2. However, the reality is that Bangladesh is even unable to construct a much needed nuclear reactor to alleviate its power sector. She is under constant external pressure to remain non-nuclear.
3. Never-the-less, the surrounding /regional powers - China, India, Pakistan and USA are nuclear. Myanmar is planning to be one. Therefore, it will be sensible for Bangladesh to come under the nuclear umbrella of an ally.

@mujib.khan

Bro, look at this thread if you have free time to waste!

http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangladesh-defence/37615-nuclear-sharing-concept-bangladesh.html
 
Back
Top Bottom