New science thread

#938

Your quote means nothing and article that you will send will mean nothing, because it has nothing to do with relation of regulation. Pakistan did not use nuclear bombs, that is very much meaning that it’s regulated. Not being allowed to have nukes is not equivalent of not being regulated.

That’s not regulations, that is domination and wanting to keep western hegemony there. Iran has right to enrich Uranium and will keep doing it. If they are able to build one that means that regulations work. Since they will have it for the protection. Just like the countries that are dictating to Iran that should not have them. If they make one, that means they have regulated them and got regulated by the allied nations that provided them resources. It’s their country, they have right to posess any weapon they want, since they do not border USA. I will quote same thing that you quoted to me which is meant for you.

That joke is on you.

#939

No one used one, the initial point is that there is potential for them to be used. One action like that could be disastrous to humanity.

Ok, I will not send the article. Still, Khan did not get nucleAr weapons through proper means because there were regulations in place. So regulations failed.

#940

Is the dog cool tho?

#941

Let me have my fun damnit

#942

Fun away then. No regulations on fun here, well only from Illfinic, sometimes

1 Like
#943

OK? And? It’s called balance. Only one country in the world used them against civilian population and we all know which one. Rest were in Cold War nuclear tests by other countries.

No regulations did not failed. China gave them and helped them. I call that very much regulation. That is proper means, one that dislikes Pakistan does not dictate should Pakistan have it or not.

#944

So what I can conclude is that you understand regulation as not using nuclear weapons. I understand it as not being able to have them. So we are arguing about different things.

#945

There are cooler stuff than that.

#946

No we do not. You just want it to be different, because it does not suit your agenda. It’s called multipolarity. One hegemonic power does not dictate other countries what weapons they should or should not posess, unless it’s superpower and it borders it.

#947

So why does Russia decide if Ukraine can have nuclear weapons?

#948

Even that was answered hour ago. But you are still doubling down like a good old lapdog as you remain.

#949

But that’s the same reason India did not want Pakistan to have them, but they do now.

#950

India is not one of the top superpowers. And it was China and USA vs India. Both USA and China are unipolar when it comes of allowing Pakistan to have nukes. And India has them too. And territorial disputes in Kashmir Regions are very minimal.

#951

Fair, but I still want to read the article about the alliances at that time. As I remember, USA was not helping Pakistan to get nuclear weapons, but I may be mistaken.

They are minimal because Pakistan has nukes. Perhaps there would be no invasion of ukraine by Russia is ukraine had nukes.

#952

Yes they did, but even if they didn’t, it’s still regulated. Russia, China and USA are 3 main players in that game.

#953

I’ll read the article

#955
#956

It’s not dreams. It’s something that have been vetted.

#957

Something that you just want to deny, because you want simply USA to be decision maker of the world.

#958

Would be good to read full chapter. The summary doesn’t not help the argument