Thanks davidylan .
keep it high Bro !

the thanks is for Davidylan.

Nuclear weapons?? thats the last thing we need on this continent, besides as long as no one has it yet we are all safe. We would be the smartest race by not having Nukes on our continent.

In the event of another world war which i think is inevitable, we can watch the western countries nuke themselves. Then they would come & beg us for our uncontaminated land Guess who the super power would be then!!

Africa needs nuclear weapons in the future, weapons aren't the way to go and they are a waste of money but you won't be talking if a real war starts, Africa got colonized and our people got brutally enslaved because we were weak and furtile one must not be naive as to think that we are in the 21st century and such a scenario cannot repeat itself. No country on earth is a good country any country can declare war on any country, so we must prepare our selves by spending our money on more reasonable things but we must develop our technology so that we may pursue a more profound role when it comes to defense
------------peace----------War-------------- All can happen simultaneously

dblock:

Africa needs nuclear weapons in the future, weapons aren't the way to go and they are a waste of money but you won't be talking if a real war starts, Africa got colonized and our people got brutally enslaved because we were weak and furtile one must not be naive as to think that we are in the 21st century and such a scenario cannot repeat itself. No country on earth is a good country any country can declare war on any country, so we must prepare our selves by spending our money on more reasonable things but we must develop our technology so that we may pursue a more profound role when it comes to defense
------------peace----------War-------------- All can happen simultaneously

Colonisation? any country tryin 2 colonise or occupy another will definitely not be using nuclear weapons on them so there will be useful land 2 use.

Pls take note that in warfare the more determined side wins & not the one with all the state of the art technology eg- US vs iraqi militia, NATO vs taliban. (in both cases there is a stalemate) Although one party has all the gadgets, the other knows the terrain.

Alright we acquire nuclear weapons then what?
How does that solve the basic problems confronting the common man;that of abject poverty,unemployment, disillusionment,lack of basic amenities,even common human rights.
Countries like Canada and Switzerland are not on the list of nuclear powers yet can boast of impressive economies and near-ideal living standards.These are the ones we need to emulate not the Armageddon protagonists.

Developing countries like India and China are busy developing weapons that they must not use while they have millions of starving citizens. That's an irresponsible use of funds obtained by taxation. We shouldn't copy them.

Chxta's World

I'd seen this thread a long time ago, but didn't want to participate in it because I felt that everyone has a right to nuclear weapons. But North Korea's irresponsible action has made me rethink that stand.

This is, quite undeniably, a disaster.

I'm not speaking in terms of the US (I really don't care about them), but in terms of the world. Nowadays, we are all citizens of the world; the old definitions of country and city are increasingly becoming blurred. Whenever another country decides to develop nuclear weapons, it is an attack against world peace. For me, either no one has them, or everyone has them so we can all kill each other in peace.

But seriously, I've never heard of anyone explaining how a nuclear bomb actually saves people (some people would come up with bullshit about how the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved a lot of American and Japanese lives), cures cancer, feeds the starving masses, etc.

So for the welfare of the world, North Korea should not have weapons, and all other countries need to disarm (fat chance that with Georgie Bushie and the likes running the shows).

Interestingly, it's not as though North Korea itself is benefitting. There's hardly a chance that they would have been attacked. If the US is to launch another large-scale military operation, it would most likely be the invasion of Iran or Syria, who are somewhat of a threat (according to Uncle George) and strategically far more significant.

Note the media response: we've seen bigger headlines for Bin Laden videos. Videos of a guy standing against a white wall talking! But fairly soon, I'm sure that there will be more sanctions on North Korea, and half their population will die of starvation. End of Kim Jong Il. Everyone's happy again.

The other thing that will happen is the increase of pressure on Iran to comply. Clearly whatever the anti-new-nuclear-countries were doing didn't get the job done. And I'm not speaking from a pro-US, pro-Israel point of view either,

Conclusion: nuclear bombs bad, North Korea insignificant, everyone can party on,

Those of you supporting the nuclear project in Nigeria, Have you all thought about the costs? We're just recovering from a massive debt and you want us to squander billions of dollars on a ing nuclear bomb.

I meant immediately after Africa becomes prosperous

@All,
Please, please and please, the mere mention of 'Nuclear' should not necessarily mean Nuclear weapons. I know the thread is asking about Nuclear weapons but a more appropriate Question should have been 'Should Africa/Nigeria have Nuclear technology"??( because you must have the technological know-how before you can develop the weapon) My unequivocal answer to this would be a big YES!!!. Nuclear technology is now being used globally in Medicine, power generation, agriculture, etc and we need to start looking actively into how we can tap into this technology. Bill Clinton gave an amazing speech recently at the Labour party conference in UK in which he charged the party to "get into the future business", a right thinking government in a country like Nigeria should get into the 'future business' and believe me; nuclear technology is going to be very prominent in near future in achieving economic development because it is a bargaining tool in global trade and politics. With all due respect, I can conviniently predict the outcome of the Iran, North-Korea Nuclear fiasco - NOTHING!! The 2 nations will earn their respect as Nuclear powers; Iran will develop it's power and manufacturing sector and it's economy will shoot like Chinas', same a North Korea, they will keep some secret nuclear bombs and use nuclear power to develop their technology sector, and use it to bargain for restriction of sanctions, more aid etc. That was how UN, USA etc condemed India and Pakistan when they developed theirs, this is a rapidly evolving world, people. Serious nations must be 'proactive and not reactive'.

@Dearzi,
I totally share and understand your concern about Nigeria and nuclear technology or weapons, but Pakistan is a country that can be placed on the same level as Nigeria with regard to socio-economic, health and demographic parameters or indices, however it is a Nuclear power today and it is using it as a bargaining tool in the arena of global politics. Nuclear technology will soon separates the boys from the men, the haves from the have-not. We are in the era of rapid globalization fuelled by capitalist ideas. Nigeria has more than enough local and internation skilled personnel who can develop and maintain nuclear technology, there is a Centre on Nuclear technology at Obafemi Awolowo University, what is needed is a government that recognise it's importance now as a matter of urgency and create a conducive policy environment for our researchers to do it. If you think we must wait until our infant mortality rate, or maternal mortalityrate etc is zero, then we are going to be so left behind in the world that Nigeria will not be relevant even in Africa talkless of world. It is becoming more difficult for any nation to develop now without the nation being aggresive. Nuclear technology will help in generating power, thereby encouraging manufacturing and other sectors through stable power, thereby creating employment. NEPA hydropower is insufficient, God forbid if Niger republic decide to buid dam, we are finished i.e power from Kanji dam; gas and coal power contribute to global warming and thus worsening agricultural productivity for farmers, but nuclear power is`a clean power source.  We can go on and on about how relevant nuclear technology is to development in this age. All the 'seriously developing countries' (not the "developing countries" in names only) e.g Venezuela, Iran, Brazil, Thailand, South Africa etc are actively exploring Nuclear power/technology because it will contribute immensely to their economic and social development. The furore over Iran and North Korea is because the nations are led by islamic fundamentalists and a sick dictator respectively both with warped minds. The IAEA is there to prevent illegal waepons and regulate the industry. Believe me, we need to start looking into Nuclear technology asap.

Some people seem to think that humans are Angels that if a level of cooperation is reached all will be eutopia and excellent, right now we have North Korea developing nukes, lets' say all of a sudden the dwarf decides to blow up Nigeria because he is jealous of OBJ's height, who wil we run to, the US and what if they don't respond becasue earlier OBJ called Bush a monkey, think about it Africa needs Nuclear technology and other things to develop this continent but we must havve defence somewhere on the list and that's where nukes come in.

dblock:

Some people seem to think that humans are Angels, lets' say all of a sudden the dwarf decides to blow up Nigeria because he is jealous of OBJ's height, who wil we run to, the US and what if they don't respond

Oh pls Nigeria is th last country 2 b worried about North korea's weapons, we are well out of range of any missle they can develop. Besides if they do develop any ICBM that can reach us, it will b shot down by the US or China (dependin on the route they decide 2 take).

Nuclear weapons or just the technology. I dont think Africa is able to manage any of the 2 yet (except SA). let us perfect the use of gas, dams, solar etc b4 jumpin 2 nuclear power

What hapens if Nigeria gets the weapon & then Cameroon decides they are no more safe & get theirs. Then some of their corrupt govt officials sell a bomb 2 (maybe Niger delta militants) will Nigeria b any safer?

Lets face it as long as no one on this continent has it we are all safe. Anyone gettin it will only lead to a chain of Nuclear armed African countries even though their govts remain unstable.

Funny how the US is the num1 critic of spreading nuclear power when they started the whole thing in the first place.

- US developed it, Nuked Japan
- Russia saw competition, got theirs
- china got scared of US & Russian nukes, got theirs too
- France & UK decided 2 join the club of world powers

Atleast at this point nobody was worried that all 5 world powers have nukes until the US decides 2 threaten India with a bomb during the India vs Pakistan war.

- So India decide they wont be intimidated by anyone, get theirs
- Arch rival Pakistan decides 2 catch up, get theirs too
- Not too sure why Isreal got theirs
- But it has made Iran need one.

Nuclear power really isnt all positive u know. What hapens to the radioactive waste product? I wonder which state in Nigeria will agree 2 be used as a dumpin ground 4 radioactive waste (well thats if its even properly disposed off) this is Nigeria u know.

Even if we wish to have one, i dont think The West (America, Britain and co) will permit it,
We've got dictatorial tendencies over here, no doubt,

So the answer is a big hell no!!!!

even if they dash us we no go fit enjoy am so make we dey look

Nuclear Weapons shouldn't be on our agenda at the moment. First thing first, I think African countries need food and medical accessibilities.


Nuclear weapons development is a way to demand for respect from the world and a way to protect the nation.

If 85% of the population in the entire African countries are struggling to eat 2 meals per day, who is going to respect you and what exactly are you trying to protect?

From my point of view, Nuclear Weapons development should be a process African countries should consider may be in 50 years time. At the moment it will be a mere waste of time and money, that we do not have.

@ Havila

You state the "difference" between Nuclear technology and Nuclear weapons. You profess that the technology is what Nigeria should aspire to and then proceed to state the advantages of Nuclear weapons as the reason for that aspiration. What are you actually advocating?


And lets not all forget that India and Pakistan never signed the "piece of paper" known as the NPT. Iran and N. Korea did which is the reason why the US/UN can "justifiably" raise hell. Nigeria also did and backing out is tantamount to joining Bush's Axis of evil. Personally I think we have other priorities, at this point we already have a strong though declining bargaining chip in Oil. By all means go for Nuclear technology if you can maintain and handle the waste properly even though we are yet to maximise other sources of electricity.

I was talking about developing nukes in the future not now, geesh, "the last thing we need is nukes we've got aids and poverty", i was talking about in the future and that we must develop our countries economically so that we can take up a more defensive role in the future (WHEN WE DON"T GOT AIDS!!!!!!!)

mochafella:

@ Havila
You state the "difference" between Nuclear technology and Nuclear weapons. You profess that the technology is what Nigeria should aspire to and then proceed to state the advantages of Nuclear weapons as the reason for that aspiration. What are you actually advocating?

Hi Mochafella,
I actually had to go over my post again, seriously, because it is either you must have read another post . I can't find where I advocated for nuclear weapons. Are you mis-interpreting my statement that Pakistan and India are using their nuclear capability as barganing tool in the global politics to mean I am advocating for nuclear weapons. Why not go over my post again because I still cant find where I stated the "advantages of Nuclear weapons". Can you point it out for clarification? Regards

@Havila

right here.

Havila:

nuclear technology is going to be very prominent in near future in achieving economic development because it is a bargaining tool in global trade and politics.

Havila:

same a North Korea, they will keep some secret nuclear bombs and use nuclear power to develop their technology sector, and use it to bargain for restriction of sanctions, more aid etc.

Nuclear Technology as a political tool is useful primarily because Nuclear weapons can follow. On its own Nuclear technology used for power generation and domestic uses carries little weight on the global scene and even less weight in bargaining for aid and sanctions. So if you are stating global politics as a reason for Nuclear tech. then its Nuclear weapons you are indirectly asking for.

Hope its clearer now?

mochafella:

@Havila
right here.Nuclear Technology as a political tool is useful primarily because Nuclear weapons can follow. On its own Nuclear technology used for power generation and domestic uses carries little weight on the global scene and even less weight in bargaining for aid and sanctions. So if you are stating global politics as a reason for Nuclear tech. then its Nuclear weapons you are indirectly asking for.
Hope its clearer now?

@Mochafella,
What you just did is ludicrous, it is called quoting out of context. What you should have done was to simply ask me "if I can clarify some of my statement" or rather pose a specific question. Rather, you gave your interpretation to my post and asked the writer if it 'is clearer now'; really very funny.

My statement or prediction on North Korea that just tested a nuclear bomb is specific for North Korea and how it's relationship with the international community might go with regards to it's nuclear capability, how it will likely use it for negotiations for aids and sanctions restrictions etc that has nothing to do with the importance of nuclear technology in the general sense of it's potential contribution to economic development of middle-income and other developing nations.

However with regard the importance of nuclear technology in economic development, basic economics will show that in a world in which there is free trade, only economies that are export driven will benefit compared to import driven economies. An economy can only be export driven when it has a strong manufacturing/technology base. Power generation is probably the most important factor in determining the strenght of manufacturing base. Many big player manufacturing firms are looking to outsource their plants to viable developing countries in the spirit of free trade, a good and stable, reliable power supply will be a bargaining tool to develop manufacturing sector. While nuclear technology will enhance the development of the macro-economic sector, obviously there will then be a spin-over effect to the micro-economy. Imagine a stable nuclear power generating electricity in Nigeria, imagine how cheap it wil be for barbers, hairdressers, mechanics, cornershops, and other artisans who constitute the heart of microeconomic to operate and make profic compared to now, imagine how unemployment will then be reduced. Imagine the effect of stable power on research in universities and hospitals, or the use of nuclear technology in medicine. In a world in which economic boudaries and borders are becoming none existent day by day, don't you see how important nuclear technology will be in influencing global trade and hence economic development. This is the idea of getting into the future business.

@ Havila

Havila:

@Mochafella,
What you just did is ludicrous, it is called quoting out of context. What you should have done was to simply ask me "if I can clarify some of my statement" or rather pose a specific question. Rather, you gave your interpretation to my post and asked the writer if it 'is clearer now'; really very funny.

I would expect you to withdraw your claim that my comment was ludicrous at the end of my explanation.
1) You made a comment about nuclear weapons and tech.
2) I made a comment about that and asked what exactly you were advocating.
3) You replied and asked for a clarification, specifically that I point out where you "stated the advantages"
4) I replied, pointing out where you stated those advantages and asked "I hope it is clearer now". i.e. I hope my initial comment asking what you were advocating is clearer now. I wasn't clarifying your comment. You asked for clarification about my question and I provided it.
I'll ask again, I hope it is clearer now?

Havila:

nuclear technology is going to be very prominent in near future in achieving economic development because it is a bargaining tool in global trade and politics.

It is all well and good to describe N Korea as a "special case" even though that is arguable. However the quote above was not made in reference to NK.

And yes I do know the influence of nuclear power generation on economic development, and its diluted, domino effect on global politics. However I also know that "Nuclear" and "Global politics" in the same statement usually refers to Nuclear weapons especially since nuclear energy is not the only source of power through which an economy can be driven.

@Moch,
Cool, not ludicrous with your explanation but was somehow confusing . I will however like to know your reasons or arguements for saying that my describing North Korea as a 'special case' is arguable. I have my reasons for seeing NK as a special case but I am willing to learn from an open minded discussion.
The only reason, if I may hazard a guess, that you think 'Nuclear' and Global politics in the same statement refers to a Nuclear weapon is simply because of the current impasse between Iran, NK on one side and UN, US etc on the other. Believe me, that phase will pass soon and it could likely go as I predicted or not.

I am sick and tired of all these idiots that keep reffering to africa like its a country, U mind mentioning a specific country in africa?

As for me, wouldnt support any bid by any north african country, Call me a racist if u want , but lets be frank, its high time we start using racial profiling, South africa is capable, ghana also but hell no , not naija

Africa should possess Nuclear Weapons to balance the quest for world peace. si vis pacem bellum gera.

Eastcoast:
The answer is no! in uppercase letters. You want one of our dictator leaders to eliminate a whole state in da twinkle of an eye. Nigeria isn't ready for nuclear weapons until our leaaders are more responsible.

What do u knw abt nuclear technology? Don't u knw that nuclear technology is an advanced nd modern technology. Even if you ve responsible leaders do u ve the technical know how? Africa is jst backward.

Seun:
Developing countries like India and China are busy developing weapons that they must not use while they have millions of starving citizens.

Do u knw the positive resultant of developing a nuclear weapon by this country? Nuclear power or nuclear energy. The advent of nuclear weapons led 2 nuclear energy. No matter how u look it, technology is beautiful. One technology innovation can lead 2 chains of technology innovations

Seun:
Developing countries like India and China are busy developing weapons that they must not use while they have millions of starving citizens. That's an irresponsible use of funds obtained by taxation. We shouldn't copy them.

Do u knw the economic impact of developing a nuclear weapon on this countries? Ans: nuclear power or energy. The advent of nuclear weapon led 2 development of nuclear energy. No matter how u look it, technology is beautiful. One technology innovation can lead 2 chains of technology innovations. African shld embrace technology.

orunto27:
Africa should possess Nuclear Weapons to balance the quest for world peace. si vis pacem bellum gera.

Possess or build? No country sells its nuclear weapon 2 anoda country

By possess, I mean build and control both the product and the factors of production. I don't mean buy. With Nigeria in the lead, the US, UK, EU, Russia, India, Pakistan etc will authorize and approve.