Quote:
Quote by: shrike  You can not equate democracy and theocracy.
I say democracies are allowed to have nukes and doing
everything it can to prevent non democracies to have it. |
When both kind sof states employ violence, I can sensibly point out similarities. I would have to be deluded to cite some inherent distinction between "theocratic" violence and "democratic" violence. Much the same can be said regarding nuclear weapons. It only adds to the fallacy when considering, as I've said numerous times, that the US is the only country to have attacked another with nukes. Did it do so in a "democratic" manner?
Doe steh following article illustrate something "democratic" about nuclear weapons, or about US allies?
Russia leaves door open for pre-emptive nukes - USATODAY.com Quote:
MOSCOW (AP) — Russia's military chief of staff said Saturday that Moscow could use nuclear weapons in preventive strikes in case of a major threat, the latest aggressive remarks from increasingly assertive Russian authorities.
"We have no plans to attack anyone, but we consider it necessary for all our partners in the world community to clearly understand ... that to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, military forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons," Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky said.
|
"Sovereignty" and "territorial integrity" are common expressions to mask state tyranny.
Another interesting point: You've previously exposed Israel as a Jewish state. In what way is that not at all akin to an ethnic state, or a theocratic one?
As much as I dislike saying it, you have neither facts nor logic to rely on here.
Grandpa h.