>The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear weapons.<
You are saying;
The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear technology.
The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear medicine.
The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear research.
Just who was it who made us the worlds mother and/or policeman? Do you understand the true meaning of sovereignty? For the life of me I don’t understand why we need our troops in every country in the world and I sure hate paying for them to be there.
If two countries want to fight it out why do we think we need to get in and pick sides thereby creating another enemy for our kids.
There's your secret globalist streak coming out. I don't care about anybody else's sovereignty except ours. The problem with the Bush administration is that they seem to worry more about Mexico's than ours. It's the same thing. Protect your own interests first. Anything less is betrayal. Once you have a position of strength from which to negotiate, then you can bestow this or that advantage on an ally. The heck with our enemies.
If another country might threaten us, we should deal with it in what ever way we must, using any means at our disposal. I'm non-negotiable on this point.
If you want, we can debate the merits of a select group of America's allies which might want to go nuclear.
The same goes for advanced biological and chemical weapons.
It's utterly insane to discuss issues of "sovereignty" for one's enemies, real, potential, or otherwise.