Originally Posted by elau and [B
bottom1[/B]]Your operative word here is "attempt". I can attempt to xxxxx all day long but until I have "accomplished" whatever xxxx, I am innocent until proven guilty. This is a law enforcement model. It doesn't work when a country is fighting terrorism. Wasn't it our Secretary of State who said we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. If that's too complicated for you, ask for help.
There actually no law, international nor domestic, to forbid any nations to obtain nuclear, bomb or other peaceful apparatus. Review Security Council Resolution 687, Non-Proliferation agreements, Nuclear test ban treaties and the Japanese constitution Get back to me when your head clears.
Don't assume me as reasonable on your own accord. I never claim to be one. Apparently willing to make wild claims without thinking (see above)
I have to put something here to avoid a "too short message error."
Timelines are important. 687  froze Iraq's rights to WMD then. All the stuff we have been talking about [with the singular exception of the fictitious niger/iraq yellowcake] was PRIOR to that date when Iraq did, in fact have the right to as much yellowcake and buildup as they wanted [whether we liked it or not]
India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea all developed weapons and it is thought that South Africa might still have them, all outside the NNPT.
The NNPT is just that. While 189 countries have signed it, much like when Bush pulled out of the Maritime Treaty a few years ago, when the mood strikes, those treaties are not worth a lot. Just ask Israel what they think about Syria.
Now, regarding your thoughts that a country can't use law enforcement techniques when fighting terrorists. Wrong. That is the ONLY model that will work. We have proven in Iraq that the Military model does not work against terrorists. It was proven in Europe against Red Brigade and IRA that Military does not work. I has been proven time and again that a worldwide law enforcement model is the best avenue to take against terrorist.
WHY? Because they are not country bound. They are not territory bound. The fluidity of their movement, along with technology means they can be EVERYWHERE and a military cannot address that. We have found that the Taliban is stronger now than it was in 2002 when we went on the attack in Afghanistan. Our Invasion of Iraq actually INCREASED the number of terrorists in that area from NONE to MANY.
Military is good for lots of things, and specific terrorist related tasks are SOME of them but using the Military as the sharp end of the stick on this war against terrorist is just badly wrongheaded.
While the SecState comment is accurate, it has no bearing on the issue. Solid worldwide law enforcement is what will bring down the most bad guys.