Or find someone else to help them out. We aren't the only nation with nuclear energy sources. When it comes to making some dough, there are some countries probably more inclined to ignore international law than the United States.

Quote Originally Posted by SSNeoperestroika
I see no reason for preference. An autocratic goverment with specific,
aggressive agendas is as dangerous now as a 'healthy' democracy with specific,
aggressive agendas. The point is, none of us will use these weapons, because
to do so would mean the end, particularly for these 'non-specific' autocratic
governments to which you refer.
Most nations wouldn't use nuclear weapons directly. However, if a terrorist organization just happened to acquire a nuclear warhead or dirty bomb, who do you think probably gave it to them? Odds are, I think, not a healthy democracy.

Plus, rationality doesn't seem to afflict our friends in North Korea. If that regime was about to be overthrown, I could see them launching nuclear weapons just for the fun of it, to take a bunch of people with them.

Western Democracies tend not to fall into that mindset.

Quote Originally Posted by macsen rufus
To date nuclear weapons have only ever been used by a "healthy" westernised democracy. When the bomb goes off, the damage is not ameliorated by the nature of the government that launched it.
So a free, open democracy is just as likely to start throwing nukes around as a state ruled by a dictator with his own hatreds and ambitions?

Quote Originally Posted by macsen rufus
Nuclear generation would basically just favour the urban and power elites, depsite all the hand-wringing about bringing development to the poor.
Uh, so what?