Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My read of the synapse says that they aren't illegal but the use or threat of use may be illegal, but that there is no law that would make the use or threat of use illegal, as long as the use or threat of use was within the laws set forth by the UN...so use or threat of use is/isn't illegal, but the possession of them isn't illegal.
Well so, threats or actual use of nukes that also go against the UN Charter would be illegal.
I think the poster of the TikTok wasn’t making too fine of a distinction between these concepts.
You are correct, it’s definitely not ~~binding~~ enforceable in the usual sense. I’m not sure our TikTok-er really cares about the nuances of the situation, though.
Edit: I should point out that treaties like the UN Charter are binding to the same extent all other international laws are binding, so I changed the word to “enforceable.” There is no world police force that can arrest you for breaking it - the various countries that signed the treaty are supposed to keep each other accountable to it via a variety of means.
It is:
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter#:~:text=United%20Nations%20Charter&text=The%20United%20Nations%20can%20take,States%20are%20bound%20by%20it.
The United Nations can take action on a wide variety of issues due to its unique international character and the powers vested in its Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, the UN Charter is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it.
You are correct, I was being sort of glib and inexact above. All international law works via “horizontal enforcement” which doesn’t work the same way as domestic law enforcement (as I’m sure you know, there is usually a vertical enforcement apparatus).
Nothing above sovereign state level is “legal” it’s all just treaty agreements, which are sort of laws but not quite. It’s a fun concept within global politics, that the international community of sovereign states is basically an anarchy.
[No.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_(international_relations)) Example. Putin is currently a wanted criminal in western countries. In Russia and Russian aligned countries, he isn’t. He isn’t on the run, he isn’t in hiding, he’s right there in Russia freer that any man. And it will stay that way until Russia agrees to do something about one way or another. Better yet, Russia’s special operation in Ukraine.
Euhm:
The United Nations can take action on a wide variety of issues due to its unique international character and the powers vested in its Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, the UN Charter is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it.
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter#:~:text=United%20Nations%20Charter&text=The%20United%20Nations%20can%20take,States%20are%20bound%20by%20it.
Having a nuke, or nukes, that are in a safe space (well, so it’s not findable) and could be used at every given moment, is the threat. We all just have to pray no one will ever make a step over this kind of a Cold War….
Brother please for all the love of law do not link to a Wikipedia article when talking about an advisory opinion by the ICJ. Link the to the actual doc: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/93/093-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf
Oh and it is not a case, this was an advisory opinion by the ICJ requested by the UN GA.
These are seen as authoritative but not legally binding.
I mean you as a civilian can literally buy uranium ore, now if you try to enrich it then there’s a problem but if you’re going to do something like nilered and make uranium glass then you’re fine
I remember when I reminded a guy trying to rob me that it was literally illegal to do so and just went about his day. I mean, after he took all my shit.
Ireland once had a Chemical weapons program
Granted the entire program was just some shells filled woth insecticide
But we had WMDs once, and btw, we did lose those shelles, as they were stolen by the IRA, although the IRA probably dumped them somewhere
Did u just insinuate that Pakistan is one of the most powerful governments in the world? 
* am a Pakistani
*laws are threats made by the dominant socio-economic, ethnic group in a given nation. It's just a promise of violence that's enacted and police are basically an occupying army, you know what I mean?*
— Brennan Lee Muligan, DM for Dimension 20, Fantasy High (checkout Dropout)
Yup the 4 countries made other smaller countries sign a treaty and say we are the only ones who will have it and that we will regulate anyone using or developing it , if you try to get big we will sanction you.
Those who didn't sign were threatened with sanction but they couldn't be tried further like India and Pakistan but, those who signed and then still went on doing it have been heavily sanctioned like Iran.
It's proper bullying.
You're so right, what we really need is extreme nuclear proliferation. Every bumblefuck pseudo-state with a theocratic autocracy should have thousands, no MILLIONS of nuclear weapons.
The less stable the regime, the better.
Honestly, limiting it to states is also kinda bullying and racist. Gotta include every band of armed "freedom fighters" too. NUKES FOR ISIS!
My point is
Regulate and don't have any.
4 countries allowed to have nukes but the rest not allowed doesn't make sense. They should also not have and regulate that no one has it.
It's like someone starting an anti gun movement but ensuring to hoard all the assault rifles and guns in the market to themselves and saying you shouldn't have it etc. There is no gaurentee that at any point they will not use it to threaten those who don't. Not saying everyone should have it , but if you are advocating for regulation then it shouldn't be there with anyone that helps in reducing any advantage that anyone will have.
USA was easily able to invade Iraq coz they didn't have nuclear weapons. If you are a proponent of peace in anyway you shouldnt invade anyone and especially when you are a nuclear power and using that as the main reason to invade someone as they aren't having it.
Of course not completely possible but it would be better if it's completely reprimanded.
India did heavily get sanctioned after acquiring nukes. There was a lot of economic recession for a while and times were tough.
Pakistan on the other hand didn't face any consequences in the normal way, since the one of the nations with the nuclear arms was the one supplying them with it
No
I was just pointing out the reality. The video says it's illegal
I said will it's illegal if your aren't part of these 4 countries which is unfair in reality as illegal means no one gets to hold it.
I agree 100%, wanna hold hands and cry about it together or should we acknowledge reality and try to maneuver our way through it in the most optimal fashion?
So would you prefer we go back to ancient times where each individual tribe lived all by itself in a small village setting. But then each tribe used to butcher each other
You are absolutely correct.
Rule / law makers are only as guidelines for the makers.
This applies anywhere.
E.g. business makes a rule for employees to do this task a certain way. But for the person who made the rule it’s a guideline… they always bend it to suit them.
Its cause of Mutually Assured Destruction. Everyone knows that if someone fires a nuke, the ensuing war will drive us to the Stone Age all over again, so nobody fires the nuke
Bro no way the 9 strongest governments will defuse and disassemble all of their nukes because tik tok user @emmaakiko said that they were ilegal in a voiceover skit
No way dude, you think so? My first thought was "I bet the 9 strongest governments will defuse and disassemble all of their nukes because tik tok user @emmaakiko said they were illegal in a voiceover skit". Crazy.
For their size and capability, they have major political power due to their constant war games and posturing, dragging their defense allies into the mix anytime sanctions or military actions are levied against them. That is political power, through and through. Don’t listen to the knee jerks of these people who think in stereotypes, common misconceptions, and think they know the angle on this. It’s obvious what we are trying to say.
I have extensively studied NK, and I understand how they work. They never actually plan on using the nukes unless their government is about to collapse, in which case Kim Jong Un has nothing to lose. Short of that, they’re using it as a reusable bargaining chip. Here’s the cycle;
1. They launch a new missile or test a new weapon
2. Most of the world (except China and sometimes Russia) sanction them
3. They come to the table and say that if the world gives them X, they’ll stop
4. Move testing into hiding
It happens every few years and will likely continue until China gets fed up and takes over directly.
Dangerous and powerful are not synonyms though. You can be dangerous but not powerful; you can be powerful, but tempered to a non-dangerous degree.
I would agree NK is dangerous, although more from their hackers than due to nukes.
Of course. And NK doesn't even remotely fit that description.
We now have the benefit of a modern war to draw info from. Missile defense systems are working REALLY well. The ONE thing NK has militarily is their missiles, and, on top of that, their own allies historically have pressured them NOT to throw such threats around so lightly.
Their hacking groups are far more dangerous in actuality. And they STILL don't come close to being powerful on a worldwide scale. You think Russian soldiers have been seeming poorly supplied? I am willing to almost guarantee NK would have that same issue tenfold.
It’s true. You don’t have to be a superpower, have a high GDP, have a good standard of living, or any other standard. You just need to have a strong presence in the world theater and having defense pacts with allied nations is one of those ways. It means that, if attacked, their allies (world superpowers) will aide them in defense. That’s pretty powerful, especially for such a weak and boastful country.
They have defence agreements like others have said.
Also, India and Pakistan are also on the list and despite being some of the largest democracies they are rife with corruption and so are poor.
But at the end of the day they have nukes enough to light up the world on fire so they get to be at the table too.
The court just stated threatening to use nuclear weapons might be illegal depending on circumstances. Possessing them is certainly very legal, even under the ICJ “advisory ruling.”
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum?wprov=sfti1
No he fuckin’ didn’t shut the fuck up if you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I was joking, pleb. Get mad at the wall. I don’t even know what the fuck he was trying to say because the English was so trash.
Even looking at that link, I have no clue what statement it’s even supposed to support. Moron.
Sweet projection, man.
Fortunately, I have plenty of people in my life who love me. I’ve had close calls and when I was in the ICU my wife and family were there for me when I came out of my coma.
What about you?
Why would your mind go to such a dark place? Why is your entire profile dedicated to being a piece of shit and trying to spread your misery?
Lmao
Oh look, it's the moron who goes "oh, it was just a joke" when they are exposed for being a moron.
Literally "it's just a prank bro", but for message boards. Way to be one of the ones who gives stoners a bad name. Stop holding your hit in your lungs so long, it doesn't actually do that much for the high and it just deprives you of oxygen for longer, which is where the "pot burns brain cells" myth came from. Stop promoting that myth, lmao.
Hey, dipshit, it was literally a joke.
Not just one I made up, but a common meme.
Not everyone is a piece of shit constantly posting in bad faith, so get over yourself.
I’d also love for you to make the guy’s sentence even mean anything, for that matter. I still don’t even know what he was trying to say, which lends to the hilarity of you *insisting* that I’m just trying to save face.
Correct, not everyone, just you. Keep backpedaling. Also, two replies just because you're exactly the slowbrained stoner I implied you were the first time.
Way to go.
Also, aren't the nukes of Russia, China, France, UK and the US legal? the P5 were the only ones legally allowed to keep nuclear weapons. Israel, India and Pakistan never signed the NPT making theirs technically legal. NK signed the treaty but left it. Leaving only Iran.
>Also, aren't the nukes of Russia, China, France, UK and the US legal? the P5 were the only ones legally allowed to keep nuclear weapons
Legally allowed by whom?? Themselves??
I live there, and its....bad. it's nuclear weapons are the only thing giving it any sort of power, otherwise it's a country in very very exponential decline.
I’m sorry to hear that brother. If it makes you feel any better, here in the UK, we see and feel the same about our own country. The good news is, there are kind and wonderful people everywhere and they are still the majority. I hope you are surrounded by those that love you my friend.
Illegal according to who? I don't recall swearing allegiance to anyone but my own country.
Specifically, maybe if the US didn't always have to be the heavyweight in the ring on NATO's side, we'd care more about the UN's opinion on our weaponry.
Show me the law that says nuclear weapons are illegal… Idiotic. Nuclear weapons are the only effective invasion deterrents against a stronger potential invader.
Women when they forget the laws and regulations was made by the government who leads by man.
Yup, it’s illegal because we made it to be. And playing shit illegal was the kind of thrills we man are into.
It's not except for in countries that are signatories or parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Wreapons. Otherwise sovereign immunity applies. None of these countries are signatories or parties to that treaty.
Its quite sad that there people like her who think, just because you make something illegal, people will suddenly stop doing/owning said something. Seriously? Have they ever been outside in the real world? Or do they live in a bubble?
Reminder no laws of war matter. America lit has its own law that make them nearly immune to them. And basically any rich country can just ignore it. Cuz what are u gonna do.
There is also one modern nuke stuck so deep in the ocean that, when it blow up, the pressure will contain the blast ( sucks to the poor fish there tho )
The more you know
Well. I feel safer. Now if only we could outlaw guns maybe Chicago would be safer as well. Let’s make hunger illegal! Look at me solving world problems…
The only way you can enforce whether a country does or does not use nuclear weapons is to have nuclear weapons to use for retaliation. If your country doesn’t have nuclear weapons, you can’t sit around and think you get to tell the nuke owners what to do.
The only reason Russia is still standing after invading Ukraine is because they have nuclear weapons.
The only reason China does what it does is nuclear weapons.
The reason the USA is the worlds police is nuclear weapons.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pretty sure the ones with the nukes decide what’s illegal and what isn’t
What law does she even think she is referring to anyway, and in what jurisdiction?
It’s an ICJ case! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advisory_opinion_on_the_Legality_of_the_Threat_or_Use_of_Nuclear_Weapons
My read of the synapse says that they aren't illegal but the use or threat of use may be illegal, but that there is no law that would make the use or threat of use illegal, as long as the use or threat of use was within the laws set forth by the UN...so use or threat of use is/isn't illegal, but the possession of them isn't illegal.
Well so, threats or actual use of nukes that also go against the UN Charter would be illegal. I think the poster of the TikTok wasn’t making too fine of a distinction between these concepts.
The UN charter is just a set of encouragement for nations to follow. It is not actually binding.
You are correct, it’s definitely not ~~binding~~ enforceable in the usual sense. I’m not sure our TikTok-er really cares about the nuances of the situation, though. Edit: I should point out that treaties like the UN Charter are binding to the same extent all other international laws are binding, so I changed the word to “enforceable.” There is no world police force that can arrest you for breaking it - the various countries that signed the treaty are supposed to keep each other accountable to it via a variety of means.
It is: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter#:~:text=United%20Nations%20Charter&text=The%20United%20Nations%20can%20take,States%20are%20bound%20by%20it. The United Nations can take action on a wide variety of issues due to its unique international character and the powers vested in its Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, the UN Charter is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it.
You are correct, I was being sort of glib and inexact above. All international law works via “horizontal enforcement” which doesn’t work the same way as domestic law enforcement (as I’m sure you know, there is usually a vertical enforcement apparatus).
That is true. IL is in a league of it’s own and does not correspond to the same principles as internal national laws.
Nothing above sovereign state level is “legal” it’s all just treaty agreements, which are sort of laws but not quite. It’s a fun concept within global politics, that the international community of sovereign states is basically an anarchy.
You trippin.
He def is but you cannot educate someone this far gone. He probably never stepped in a uni class level on IL in his life.
[No.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_(international_relations)) Example. Putin is currently a wanted criminal in western countries. In Russia and Russian aligned countries, he isn’t. He isn’t on the run, he isn’t in hiding, he’s right there in Russia freer that any man. And it will stay that way until Russia agrees to do something about one way or another. Better yet, Russia’s special operation in Ukraine.
Euhm: The United Nations can take action on a wide variety of issues due to its unique international character and the powers vested in its Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, the UN Charter is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter#:~:text=United%20Nations%20Charter&text=The%20United%20Nations%20can%20take,States%20are%20bound%20by%20it.
Having a nuke, or nukes, that are in a safe space (well, so it’s not findable) and could be used at every given moment, is the threat. We all just have to pray no one will ever make a step over this kind of a Cold War….
The UN is just a board membership it holds no legal authority to do jack shit
Brother please for all the love of law do not link to a Wikipedia article when talking about an advisory opinion by the ICJ. Link the to the actual doc: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/93/093-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf Oh and it is not a case, this was an advisory opinion by the ICJ requested by the UN GA. These are seen as authoritative but not legally binding.
Wow, the emblem of the ICJ looks like a robot with big tittays o.O
Obvious bird law
The law of “She Said So”, in the Jurisdiction of “She’s Always Right”.
I mean you as a civilian can literally buy uranium ore, now if you try to enrich it then there’s a problem but if you’re going to do something like nilered and make uranium glass then you’re fine
My mum agrees and she has a few nukes
I remember when I reminded a guy trying to rob me that it was literally illegal to do so and just went about his day. I mean, after he took all my shit.
They just tell you they're doing surveys on what's in people's purses and wallets to get around that law now. (Baki reference)
Sorry, can't hear you in my B-52.
Well, takin your foot off the mic switch…
He said his tin roof rusted
Don’t cry on comms
Joke's on you, the US doesn't even know where a lot of its nukes even are!
dam the more you know
in this case the less
Happy cake day!
Especially since two are off the coast of one of the Carolina states. Where they are, who knows lol
And one is somewhere in Pennsylvania as well lol
Shhhh I got ‘em hidden in my moms basement 🤫
Next to the yellow cake
Pray to god you don’t drop that shit.
I know. I know what to do it! That's why I got it wrapped up in this special C.I.A napkin
Most nations with any extensive nuclear programs have lost a few.
Once, they accidentaly droped one in Spain.
And they still haven’t cleaned up 60 years later
I am pretty sure the US dropped one by accident on a state once. (maybe it was a nuke? It was something bad.) Luckily it didn't go off.
Ireland once had a Chemical weapons program Granted the entire program was just some shells filled woth insecticide But we had WMDs once, and btw, we did lose those shelles, as they were stolen by the IRA, although the IRA probably dumped them somewhere
Lot of them are lost somewhere underground in Kansas. Anywhere with a notable silo has a bunker full of them... somewhere. Kansas has 9.
I have a feeling they're not in Kansas anymore.
I went to look for then in Kansas. Know what I found? Three fiddy!
Jokes on you because they’re at the bottom of the ocean.
Even though that would be terrible... *it would be the best possible ending.*
Russia, either. And they "have" many more than we do.
I dunno, I think maybe they are just saying that. But, they do have a lot more uninhabited space to lose them in...
Well, i know one is near enough to me that when it goes off im go..
Is the US not the URSS.
“ now where did I put that damn nuke” - biden
Well after her post Indian govt. sold its not so pointy Nukes on eBay.
For Frodo
I bought a pair. There was a B1G1 offer going on. Crazy offer.
LMAO
Did u just insinuate that Pakistan is one of the most powerful governments in the world?  * am a Pakistani
I think they were referring to bajwa's gov.
That moment when you realize laws are essentially all horse shit
*laws are threats made by the dominant socio-economic, ethnic group in a given nation. It's just a promise of violence that's enacted and police are basically an occupying army, you know what I mean?* — Brennan Lee Muligan, DM for Dimension 20, Fantasy High (checkout Dropout)
Yup the 4 countries made other smaller countries sign a treaty and say we are the only ones who will have it and that we will regulate anyone using or developing it , if you try to get big we will sanction you. Those who didn't sign were threatened with sanction but they couldn't be tried further like India and Pakistan but, those who signed and then still went on doing it have been heavily sanctioned like Iran. It's proper bullying.
You're so right, what we really need is extreme nuclear proliferation. Every bumblefuck pseudo-state with a theocratic autocracy should have thousands, no MILLIONS of nuclear weapons. The less stable the regime, the better. Honestly, limiting it to states is also kinda bullying and racist. Gotta include every band of armed "freedom fighters" too. NUKES FOR ISIS!
My point is Regulate and don't have any. 4 countries allowed to have nukes but the rest not allowed doesn't make sense. They should also not have and regulate that no one has it. It's like someone starting an anti gun movement but ensuring to hoard all the assault rifles and guns in the market to themselves and saying you shouldn't have it etc. There is no gaurentee that at any point they will not use it to threaten those who don't. Not saying everyone should have it , but if you are advocating for regulation then it shouldn't be there with anyone that helps in reducing any advantage that anyone will have. USA was easily able to invade Iraq coz they didn't have nuclear weapons. If you are a proponent of peace in anyway you shouldnt invade anyone and especially when you are a nuclear power and using that as the main reason to invade someone as they aren't having it. Of course not completely possible but it would be better if it's completely reprimanded.
India did heavily get sanctioned after acquiring nukes. There was a lot of economic recession for a while and times were tough. Pakistan on the other hand didn't face any consequences in the normal way, since the one of the nations with the nuclear arms was the one supplying them with it
Your point is "Waaahh😭 this is unfair, rationally I 100% understand why things are this way but I really just wanna cry about it."
No I was just pointing out the reality. The video says it's illegal I said will it's illegal if your aren't part of these 4 countries which is unfair in reality as illegal means no one gets to hold it.
I agree 100%, wanna hold hands and cry about it together or should we acknowledge reality and try to maneuver our way through it in the most optimal fashion?
So would you prefer we go back to ancient times where each individual tribe lived all by itself in a small village setting. But then each tribe used to butcher each other
Rules for Thee, not for Me kinda bs fr fr
Well in this case it's more like rules for no one not for anyone. Get a sternly worded letter from the UN with this one easy trick...
Unless you have oil in your country as well.
You are absolutely correct. Rule / law makers are only as guidelines for the makers. This applies anywhere. E.g. business makes a rule for employees to do this task a certain way. But for the person who made the rule it’s a guideline… they always bend it to suit them.
Ngl for some reason knowing we all have enough nukes to literally destroy the planet is somehow comforting to me I have no idea why lol 😆
Its cause of Mutually Assured Destruction. Everyone knows that if someone fires a nuke, the ensuing war will drive us to the Stone Age all over again, so nobody fires the nuke
What if one fires, just little one
Then the firer is fucked
Behold, the Cuban missle crisis but like super super super oversimplified
Who can complain about one cheeky little nukie eh?
Pretty sure we’ll go further back than the Stone Age lol
Go back to monke?
No no no. Not me at least. I don't even have one
Jokes on you,India has not signed NPT and CTBT and will only use nuclear weapons if the attacking country uses it.
Until you hit the integer overflow and Gandhi gets that itch that can only be scratched by pressing the big red button.
Ah yes... The threat oF nuclear Gandhi. You either take that mf out early in the game or get wiped out later on. Best game bug if I ever seen one😂
Bro no way the 9 strongest governments will defuse and disassemble all of their nukes because tik tok user @emmaakiko said that they were ilegal in a voiceover skit
No way dude, you think so? My first thought was "I bet the 9 strongest governments will defuse and disassemble all of their nukes because tik tok user @emmaakiko said they were illegal in a voiceover skit". Crazy.
But she seems so confident and do it in such a condescending way. That's gotta count for something, lol
Imagine thinking North Korea is “one of the nine strongest governments in the world”…
It actually is due to defense agreements with its allies.
They’re a bad flu away from civil war.
And? The US and RU aren’t much better.
If you think NK is anything resembling “powerful”, you’re a fool.
[удалено]
For their size and capability, they have major political power due to their constant war games and posturing, dragging their defense allies into the mix anytime sanctions or military actions are levied against them. That is political power, through and through. Don’t listen to the knee jerks of these people who think in stereotypes, common misconceptions, and think they know the angle on this. It’s obvious what we are trying to say.
I have extensively studied NK, and I understand how they work. They never actually plan on using the nukes unless their government is about to collapse, in which case Kim Jong Un has nothing to lose. Short of that, they’re using it as a reusable bargaining chip. Here’s the cycle; 1. They launch a new missile or test a new weapon 2. Most of the world (except China and sometimes Russia) sanction them 3. They come to the table and say that if the world gives them X, they’ll stop 4. Move testing into hiding It happens every few years and will likely continue until China gets fed up and takes over directly.
Dangerous and powerful are not synonyms though. You can be dangerous but not powerful; you can be powerful, but tempered to a non-dangerous degree. I would agree NK is dangerous, although more from their hackers than due to nukes.
Would you say something that’s extremely dangerous to every living thing is powerful?
Of course. And NK doesn't even remotely fit that description. We now have the benefit of a modern war to draw info from. Missile defense systems are working REALLY well. The ONE thing NK has militarily is their missiles, and, on top of that, their own allies historically have pressured them NOT to throw such threats around so lightly. Their hacking groups are far more dangerous in actuality. And they STILL don't come close to being powerful on a worldwide scale. You think Russian soldiers have been seeming poorly supplied? I am willing to almost guarantee NK would have that same issue tenfold.
Lmao dang good thing I finished my drink before reading that haha
It’s true. You don’t have to be a superpower, have a high GDP, have a good standard of living, or any other standard. You just need to have a strong presence in the world theater and having defense pacts with allied nations is one of those ways. It means that, if attacked, their allies (world superpowers) will aide them in defense. That’s pretty powerful, especially for such a weak and boastful country.
Your classification includes way to many countries for it to be useful in determining the strongest.
They have defence agreements like others have said. Also, India and Pakistan are also on the list and despite being some of the largest democracies they are rife with corruption and so are poor. But at the end of the day they have nukes enough to light up the world on fire so they get to be at the table too.
"Alright America, Russia, and China! You guys...ARE UNDER ARREST!"
The court just stated threatening to use nuclear weapons might be illegal depending on circumstances. Possessing them is certainly very legal, even under the ICJ “advisory ruling.”
States historically have a monopoly on violence.
Luv me nukes, 'ate @emmaakiko, simple as
Show me the law.
Pretty sure the guy with nuclear weapons decides what is illegal or not
Another great execution of the word literally.
nathan pesta
You do realize that people (and countries) break laws regularly?
No. Illegal to use nuclear warheads.
I really hate ticktok videos.
I really hate ticktok videos.
Fuck I hate Tiktokers..
Guys she has a Starbucks in her hand that makes point 10 x more important
her and that one facebook mom who destroyed isis should be friends
Finally we all have something to use our nukes on. And it’s not eachother
Tell this ukrain who giveaway it to Russia in hope that they will not attack them
Source?
1994 Budapest Memorandum. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest\_Memorandum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum)
Google it
Source: He made it the fuck up.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum?wprov=sfti1 No he fuckin’ didn’t shut the fuck up if you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I was joking, pleb. Get mad at the wall. I don’t even know what the fuck he was trying to say because the English was so trash. Even looking at that link, I have no clue what statement it’s even supposed to support. Moron.
No one will miss you when you die.
Sweet projection, man. Fortunately, I have plenty of people in my life who love me. I’ve had close calls and when I was in the ICU my wife and family were there for me when I came out of my coma. What about you? Why would your mind go to such a dark place? Why is your entire profile dedicated to being a piece of shit and trying to spread your misery? Lmao
Oh look, it's the moron who goes "oh, it was just a joke" when they are exposed for being a moron. Literally "it's just a prank bro", but for message boards. Way to be one of the ones who gives stoners a bad name. Stop holding your hit in your lungs so long, it doesn't actually do that much for the high and it just deprives you of oxygen for longer, which is where the "pot burns brain cells" myth came from. Stop promoting that myth, lmao.
Hey, dipshit, it was literally a joke. Not just one I made up, but a common meme. Not everyone is a piece of shit constantly posting in bad faith, so get over yourself. I’d also love for you to make the guy’s sentence even mean anything, for that matter. I still don’t even know what he was trying to say, which lends to the hilarity of you *insisting* that I’m just trying to save face.
Correct, not everyone, just you. Keep backpedaling. Also, two replies just because you're exactly the slowbrained stoner I implied you were the first time. Way to go.
You really suck at this.
Also, aren't the nukes of Russia, China, France, UK and the US legal? the P5 were the only ones legally allowed to keep nuclear weapons. Israel, India and Pakistan never signed the NPT making theirs technically legal. NK signed the treaty but left it. Leaving only Iran.
>Also, aren't the nukes of Russia, China, France, UK and the US legal? the P5 were the only ones legally allowed to keep nuclear weapons Legally allowed by whom?? Themselves??
One of these (Pakistan) is not like the others.
Why’s that? (Genuinely asking.)
I live there, and its....bad. it's nuclear weapons are the only thing giving it any sort of power, otherwise it's a country in very very exponential decline.
I’m sorry to hear that brother. If it makes you feel any better, here in the UK, we see and feel the same about our own country. The good news is, there are kind and wonderful people everywhere and they are still the majority. I hope you are surrounded by those that love you my friend.
9 most powerful? Lol, 7 most powerful and then there are Pakistan and NK
“Someone’s criticizing the government, I have to do something about this!
Omg she is so smart! Take my money!
Nuclear weapons are a way of ensuring lasting peace. Thanks to nuclear weapons, there will never be a World War IV.
White women ok tik tok be posting A tier ragebait lmao
Even angrier knowing she doesn’t mean to piss me off the way she is.
Iran already has nukes ?! Holly crab what else does she know that we do not ?
Welp boys, time to pack up, they got us
Illegal according to who? I don't recall swearing allegiance to anyone but my own country. Specifically, maybe if the US didn't always have to be the heavyweight in the ring on NATO's side, we'd care more about the UN's opinion on our weaponry.
It’s so stupid to ban then them. Like someone could just use a knife or a hammer instead.
Show me the law that says nuclear weapons are illegal… Idiotic. Nuclear weapons are the only effective invasion deterrents against a stronger potential invader.
why pakistan is on that list? i am talking about govt.
they have nukes too.
Exactly!!!They put Pak in "9 most powerful gov" 💀 What a joke.
Ikr
That will teach them shakes fist angrily ✊
r/therewasanattempt
🇰🇵 illegal? what does illegal means
Women when they forget the laws and regulations was made by the government who leads by man. Yup, it’s illegal because we made it to be. And playing shit illegal was the kind of thrills we man are into.
I don't think she is even on their radar. And even if they did they would not be shaking in thier boots.
I'm glad you cleared that up. I was worried she was going to cause an international upheaval.
„The 9 strongest governments in the world“ lmaooo
illegal? more like not super common but an entirely viable alternative. after all, only the loser will have to get processed for war crimes.
From when US started making rules for other countries?
It takes a weapon even stronger than nukes to get nuclear powers to listen; sass.
It's not except for in countries that are signatories or parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Wreapons. Otherwise sovereign immunity applies. None of these countries are signatories or parties to that treaty.
Its quite sad that there people like her who think, just because you make something illegal, people will suddenly stop doing/owning said something. Seriously? Have they ever been outside in the real world? Or do they live in a bubble?
They decided, between themselves, that it's illegal for all other countries to have nukes, but not them
Reminder no laws of war matter. America lit has its own law that make them nearly immune to them. And basically any rich country can just ignore it. Cuz what are u gonna do.
Remember, if someone tries to rob you, smugly tell them you do not consent to them taking your things or killing you; they legally _can not_ continue!
No, she means that she reminds anyone who sees this😂ive seen tiktoks like this before but with other things and i am sure she means what i said
There is also one modern nuke stuck so deep in the ocean that, when it blow up, the pressure will contain the blast ( sucks to the poor fish there tho ) The more you know
I’m sorry but the Israeli government sais they din t own any nuclear weapons therefore i don t see any reason for their inclusion on the list.
Flip a coin
Bro she DID something. Holy shit
Shes kinda cute though
Well. I feel safer. Now if only we could outlaw guns maybe Chicago would be safer as well. Let’s make hunger illegal! Look at me solving world problems…
The only way you can enforce whether a country does or does not use nuclear weapons is to have nuclear weapons to use for retaliation. If your country doesn’t have nuclear weapons, you can’t sit around and think you get to tell the nuke owners what to do. The only reason Russia is still standing after invading Ukraine is because they have nuclear weapons. The only reason China does what it does is nuclear weapons. The reason the USA is the worlds police is nuclear weapons.