I think pretty much sooner or later we are going to have to realize other countries are going to develop nuclear weapons, whether we like it or not.
While we already have an Islamic country, Pakistan, with nuclear capabilities, and if Iran goes through it will be another Islamic country, but neither of those are Arab countries.
I recall in the 80s, how Libyan leader Qaddafi (sp??) made a deal out of getting an “Arab bomb” so to speak.
So just wonder which Arab countries are most sophisticated enough to develop a nuclear device or which country do you think will be first.
I am not really looking for a debate on this that is why I put it there, I was looking for an opinion that is somewhat realistic on an Arab nation’s ability to pull off making one.
In terms of financial resources and political stability, I think Saudi Arabia is the only Arab country that could do it with any degree of ease. Whether they have any plans, or even desire to do so is another matter.
Egypt could certainly build nuclear weapons if it so desired; it’s got the resources and the technology. Egypt is much larger than any other Arab nation in terms of population, is stable, and has an economy as large as Saudi Arabia’s, though of course it’s more split up. They don’t build them, I would assume, because they simply don’t have a lot of reason to and many reasons not to. The U.S. provides Egypt with a lot of money, in effect to buy their peaceful co-existenced with Israel, and Egypt likes things that way. If things went south with regards to Israel, Egypt could build the bomb.
The KSA is not as stable as you might think. They have a demographic issue that is really hurting them. Too many Princes essentially, bleeding the economy dry. It’s a really old story, they need a culling of the nobility. The US supports the KSA, without US support the Saudis would drop like a rock, and the US would probably withdraw support if they acquired nukes. I don’t think it’ll happen anytime soon there. I really can’t see any Arab country acquiring nukes anytime soon.
Yes France has a larger Arab population, but it seems to me that the French government would not idly stand by while nutjobs like Omar Bakri publicly called for the establishment of an Islamic state, the way that the British government has. The French are less worried about hurting the fundamentalists’ delicate little feelings.
It is simply not true. France has a long way to go to actually being “Islamic” and Pakistan already has the bomb.
For Steyn to come close, the question would have to be changed to the rather convoluted “What country that eventually became Islamic was the first to acquire a nuclear weapon?” (And that implies that France will beat the UK in the race to Islam. Besides which the claim that France is really “becoming” Islamic is so much hooey.)
I doubt it will be Iraq; I have serious doubts that there will even be an Iraq in ten, twenty years, much less that it’ll be in a position to build nukes. I go with Egypt, if any of them do.
Hmm, never knew that…is that just a UK thing or worldwide? I doubt anyone outside of the UK would consider “Paki” an insult any more than calling someone from England a Brit…or Germans calling Americans, “Amis”. Then again, it is not like there are multitudes of people from Pakistan in Las Vegas, so what do I know?
Regarding the first Arab country with a nuclear weapon? I think the scarier question is, “who will be the first Arab cell with a suitcase bomb?”
Do you call people “Japs” if they come from Japan?
“Nigger” is just another word for “negro”?
Same thing in the UK… “Paki” has been used as a catch-all term for anyone of south asian descent (i.e. Indian sub-continent"), and has taken on significant negative meaning.
Bush himself used “Paki” and ended up in hot water. It is mainly a disparaging term with a nasty racist history in the UK, but its offensiveness has spread back to the homeland. It’s best avoided.
