22% of world GDP, the world's largest & most effective military, the permanent seat on the UN security council, & the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
I agree we shouldn't go barging into other countries unilaterally, but are there really people that want to argue it's wrong for the US to use its power to stop other countries from obtaining nuclear weapons?
> but are there really people that want to argue it's wrong for the US to use its power to stop other countries from obtaining nuclear weapons?
Yes, when the USA shows favoritism.
A nation at the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea has never signed the NPT, has nearly 300 warheads and in 1973 had some of those loaded on US-supplied F-4s about to launch the third-ever nuclear strike in history.
Am not sure the only country in the world to use nuclear weapons in aggression and / or for political reasons has much clout in this area.
"we'll do what we want, you'll do as your told".
In some respects you're right, the leading war lords of the day do get to dictate to the lower players. Has always been the way, and probably always will. Doesn't make it right (or righteous) however those in power deem to "word" it.
As a former US Army soldier / veteran I would hesitate on calling us the largest military in the world. China's military positively dwarfs ours and believe it or not, North Korea has the most special forces of any military last I checked. That being said because we spend more yearly on defense than most countries have as gdp, we undoubtedly have one of the most effective militaries. I'd lump the NSA under the military term since they fall under the DoD and ultimately the Pentagon here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation...
I agree we shouldn't go barging into other countries unilaterally, but are there really people that want to argue it's wrong for the US to use its power to stop other countries from obtaining nuclear weapons?