From: "Gary Wiltshire" 

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:29:59 -0500, Adam  wrote:

> Gary Wiltshire wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:35:33 -0500, Adam field.near the bridge">
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Geo wrote:
>>>> "Adam"
<""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near the
bridge">
>>>> wrote in
>>>> message news:44169827$1{at}w3....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Fine so let's get Iran etc armed now. I don't mind if
every country
>>>>> down
>>>>> to dare I say it...Belgium...gets nukes. However the
current "system"
>>>>> is unsustainable & thus the choice remains - World
full of nukes or
>>>>> World empty of nukes. To Say ""Oh
Britain/France/US/Russia/PRC are
>>>>> just
>>>>> so much more responsible with weapons of vast death
& terror" is not
>>>>> sustainable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you can't develop nukes in secret then you aren't in control
>>>> enough to
>>>> guarantee they won't get used by someone other than the government.
>>>>
>>> A) Nah coz The manhatten project was known to the British
& Soviets &
>>> all subsequent nuclear programs have been detected.
>>  Manhattan, certainly, but you have no way to ascertain or prove the
>> rest of your sentence.
>>>
>
> Name the ones which weren't.

No shit, SHERLOCK.  You just proved my point.  How would YOU KNOW about any
program successfully kept secret?
>
> The USSR was incredibly closely monitored wrt it's early nuclear
> program. Later China too had a lot of interest in any odd shaped
> buildings & seismic activity.
>
> The UK & France made no secret of their programs.
>
> Israel was known about as were both the NK & SA weapons programs. Brazil
> & Argentina were closely watched.
>
> & Pakistan & India both were less than discreet.

And it looks like, from recent news, that Saddam managed to convince his
own generals that he had WMDs to defend the country, to the point they were
dismayed at the last minute to find they didn't.  If a man waves a toy gun
in a crowd, the cops can be forgiven for believing him serious.
>
> Adam



--
Gary Wiltshire

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5