> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Minette > Sent: Wednesday, 18 January 2006 1:21 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Nuclear Iran > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Russell Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:55 PM > Subject: Re: Nuclear Iran > > > > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > >We (the international community) can always resort to a MAD-like > > >position to enforce anti-proliferation. (In fact that might be an > > >inevitability) A formalization of the "Nuclear Club" would > be a sign > > >that such is indeed on the way. > > > > > > > > But isn't that what the Security Council is? I mean, when > it was set up, > > it was the "Nuclear Club", and it used that MAD-like > position to control > > proliferation (though not as successfully as they might have hoped). > > The Security Council was the five major powers of the Allies > after WWII. > France was in there as a gift from the US. At the time, only > the US had > nuclear weapons. Also, at that time, the only significant > military forces > were those of the US and the USSR. >
Gee, its lucky the Germans and Japanese waited around till America joined the war isnt it, or they would have overrun all of Europe, England, Africa, the Middle East and most of Asia/Oceania, given that the miserable British Commonwealth (and other allied)forces had just been sitting around having picnics. Size Isn't Everything Maru _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
