Maggie you are missing my point entirely. A nuke would not be for us against mainland US. Ill repeat for those up the back NOT FOR MAINLAND USA. It would be for regional use, and use as a deterrant against a conventional counterattack by the US or others. Regional counterattack, not counterattack on mainland USA.
Quote:
|
Selling nukes to terrorists is no more in his interest than having them himself, or invading Kuwait. But that didn't stop him then either.
|
Errr. No. Firstly having them is great, nukes give you instant power and instant weight when it comes to the realpolitik of these situations. It would give him fantastic regional bargaining power alone. Invading Kuwait was very much in his interest, it would give him unshared control of that oil field, and that is one big ass oil field. Selling nukes to terrorists for use against the US would gain him nothing directly and in the long term bring him down. He's not the most sane man on earth but there is a cold, hard inalienable logic about having nukes you cannot escape. He wants to survive and grow, in the region, nuking the US would work towards neither of those. Secondly a nationals national interest is defined the leaders of that nation, not our take on it.