Nuclear prohibition has failed

[John Galt]

[exploited]

[Mother Teresa]

[exploited]

If by successful you mean "has had zero impact whatsoever," then yes, you are correct. The rate of nuclear acquisition has been unchanged for sixty years. It will slow only as it reaches maximum potential - the number of states desiring a nuke is finite, and we are on track to reach that number in the next ten to twenty years.

Has nothing to do with the voluntary Treaty, as Galt's own links make perfectly clear.

[John Galt]

[exploited]

You're forgetting eight states bro. Twelve if you count those who have disarmed.

[Dylan]

Iran isn't Arab and the ME will most likely be an enormous pile of rubble once the oil runs out.

Spider has a point.

[exploited]

Once the oil runs out, the ME will destroy itself, therefore they can't have nukes because this will make the destruction easier? Huh?

On one hand, it is the ultimate military deterrent, on the other, they'll just start flinging nukes at each other because... why not? How better to gain territory and secure habitable land (presumably the most important asset they have considering the oil will have mysteriously disappeared) than by nuking it?

It comes down to the assumption that "those people" can't handle the power that comes with nuclear weapons, but the countries who have 20,000 warheads and have actually used them can. I'm hesitant to describe it as racism since I know you guys aren't racist... But I gotta say, it sure seems like it.

[Spider]

[Spider]