- #1
crazycalhoun
Yes or no...and why?
From whose point of view - a Venezuelan's or an outsider's ?crazycalhoun said:Yes or no...and why?
Why do you ask? Can you put some perspective on your question? Do you have an opinion on this? If so, state it and provide support. If not, explain the pros and cons as you see them to start discussion and some reason why it's relevant to this forum, otherwise this thread will not last very long without some direction.crazycalhoun said:Yes or no...and why?
Gokul43201 said:From whose point of view - a Venezuelan's or an outsider's ?
Moonbear said:Why do you ask?
Can you put some perspective on your question? Do you have an opinion on this?
If so, state it and provide support.
If not, explain the pros and cons as you see them to start discussion and some reason why it's relevant to this forum, otherwise this thread will not last very long without some direction.
loseyourname said:I would say no, because Venezuela's security concerns are primarily domestic from what I know, and nuclear weapons are useless domestically.
Yes, because it would lead to all the other South American countries getting them and this would have two beneficial effects: It would show up the hypocracy of the current nuclear power characterizing every other country that wants nucear weapons as unstable or unsuitable, or something else nasty. This is just racism plain and simple.
Many nations that want nuclear weapons are unstable (some because they are unstable), with or without nuclear weapons, but I don't think it is a prevailing view to automatically equate the two. However, there is a simple economic reality at work here: most of the countries with nuclear weapons are rich (because building nukes requires a lot of money) and rich countries tend to be more stable than poorer ones. Ie, the reason North Korea is poor is the same reason it is unstable: the country is mismanaged due to it's leadership.selfAdjoint said:It would show up the hypocracy of the current nuclear power characterizing every other country that wants nucear weapons as unstable or unsuitable, or something else nasty. This is just racism plain and simple.
russ_watters said:Venezuela is relatively stable and I don't think there would be any reason for someone to claim that it is unstable just because they might develop nukes.
It would be cheaper to buy them from North Korea or Pakistan.crazycalhoun said:Yes or no...and why?
Developing nuclear weapons is a complex and controversial decision for any country, and there are a variety of perspectives on whether it is necessary or advisable for Venezuela specifically.
Some argue that having nuclear weapons could increase Venezuela's global power and deter potential threats from other countries. It could also be seen as a symbol of national pride and sovereignty.
The development of nuclear weapons could lead to increased tensions and potential conflicts with other countries, as well as economic sanctions and other forms of isolation from the international community. There is also the risk of accidental or intentional use of the weapons, resulting in catastrophic consequences.
The decision to develop nuclear weapons could greatly strain Venezuela's relationships with other countries, particularly those who are opposed to nuclear proliferation. It could also lead to increased suspicion and hostility from neighboring countries and the international community.
There are alternative methods of national defense that do not involve the development of nuclear weapons. These include investing in conventional military capabilities, developing diplomatic relationships with other countries, and participating in international arms control agreements. It is important for Venezuela to carefully consider all options before making a decision on whether to pursue nuclear weapons development.