Bush likes to remind us over and over that an Iranian nuclear bomb
would be a violation of the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Iran signed that treaty and agreed not to develop nuclear weapons.
the treaty also calls for the five countries who had nuclear weapons
in 1970 – the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, and China –
to begin reducing their stockpiles and eventually eliminate them
entirely. To the best of my knowledge, not one of the five countries
has intentionally destroyed a single nuclear weapon. So are we going
to have to attack Britain, France, Russia, China, and the United
States as well?
Pakistan, India, nor Israel signed the pact, and each of them developed
nuclear weapons. But the U.S. government is only harassing Iran
who, by the terms of the treaty, has allowed international inspectors
into its country to see what it's doing. And so far, the inspectors
have found nothing.
the United States is not only dishonoring the treaty by not reducing
its weapons, but in fact has been developing new nuclear weapons,
non-nuclear nations are condemning the U.S. for violating the treaty
while trying to impose it upon other nations.
Bush has responded to these condemnations by saying that –
you guessed it – 9/11 changed everything. If we take his words
literally, he's saying that the U.S. can develop new nuclear weapons
and use them to bomb terrorists. But that would certainly mean the
murder of enormous numbers of innocent civilians.
one has answered – or until now, even asked – the obvious
question: Why is it that the United States can have a nuclear arsenal
far larger than that of every other country in the world combined,
but that Iran can't have even a single nuclear bomb – especially
when Israel, Pakistan, and India have nuclear weapons?
But then, that’s the mission of TV news: to avoid asking the obvious