Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The precedents set by US policy ensures anyone who has nukes and gets rid of them is potentially in danger. Especially if they're not aligned with the West. Has anyone noticed that there are virtually no members of the non aligned nations left?
Your post makes no sense. The globalist torn down white SA and the white population is declining, and the country is worse off.
Why are you desperately trying to link nukes and racism, when it makes no sense? Even worse, you come across as a racist when you defend the Apartheid system.
Black people are not worse off today, and since blacks are the majority in SA, the whole country is not worse off.
Why are you desperately trying to link nukes and racism, when it makes no sense? Even worse, you come across as a racist when you defend the Apartheid system.
Black people are not worse off today, and since blacks are the majority in SA, the whole country is not worse off.
I'm linking giving up your nukes and being taken over by the globalist and being worse off. Actually the average black SA is worse off because the country is worse off. And I noticed no where did you show any concern for the average white SA.
I'm linking giving up your nukes and being taken over by the globalist and being worse off. Actually the average black SA is worse off because the country is worse off. And I noticed no where did you show any concern for the average white SA.
Black South Africans will not agree with you. They would never want to go back to an Apartheid system.
White SA's account for less than 10% of the population, i.e. they are a small minority, so naturally what matters is the bulk of SA's, i.e. the 80% black and 10% brown population.
I am indeed in favor of all countries canceling those treaties that prohibit countries from getting nukes.
There is no reason why only half a dozen or so countries (among them rogues ones such as Israel or Pakistan) are allowed to have them. If I were president of one of those other countries I would set an ultimatum to the UN: either all countries get rid of all their nukes by a certain deadline (controlled by independent observers like in Iran etc.) or my country would cancel the non-proliferation agreement and get some, too.
I don't think most countries want the responsibility and headache of having nukes.
I don't think most countries want the responsibility and headache of having nukes.
Sure, many don't even have the resources to do it. Then again, nobody forces anyone to have nukes, but they should be allowed to have them if they want to and can.
There is no reason why only half a dozen or so countries (among them rogues ones such as Israel or Pakistan) are allowed to have them.
Pakistan, India, Israel and South Sedan never signed the non-proliferation treaty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
