Libya had them until recently. Was only public knowledge when ISIS were steering towards their territory and they had them and the UN or US got them moved to Germany apparently to be destroyed.
Ukrine? After declaring thier independence from the Soviet Union, they were immediately propelled to third place in their number of nukes. They then gave them all back to Russia.
I came to post this too, but I'm guessing they fall under the disclaimer "Not counting countries that hold nuclear weapons under the control of another country."
Uh ive no idea whether israel is a threat or whatever...but what i do know is that their intelligence is one among the finest in the world...good quiz b/w;)
Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan all had nuclear weapons after the fall of the USSR in 1991. Belarus had 81, Kazakhstan had 1,400 and Ukraine had over 5,000. Kazakhstan gave them up in 1995, and Ukraine and Belarus gave them up in 1996. You should add them.
It looks like Quizmaster is right, the nuclear weapons were located in Ukraine, but they weren't able to use them:
While Ukraine had physical control of the weapons, it did not have operational control of the weapons as they were dependent on Russian-controlled electronic Permissive Action Links and the Russian command and control system.
I don't trust most countries in the world, but it seems that out of the more powerful ones, Russia, China, and the USA are especially untrustworthy, and to be honest, evil at times.
The countries with the strongest and most stable political or democratic institutions, with low levels of corruption, a strong rule of law, and positive diplomatic and trade relations with the majority of other countries in the world could be considered more trustworthy than others. But any country's leadership can take a turn for the worse and this can happen very quickly and unexpectedly. See... the US going from Obama to Trump. Or the rise of Hitler, Mussolini, Khomeini or Castro. But the Obama -> Trump transition is arguably the most remarkable downgrade in leadership quality in modern world history, both in its severity and rapidity.
Best solution to this problem would probably be to make it so NO country has nuclear weapons. They are too dangerous to keep around anywhere.
So glad South Africa stopped their nuclear program... Imagine what can happen in such a weak, under-developed country... Would probably be worse than Pakistan...
Pakistan may not have misused nuclear weapons yet, but @Abhishek has a point. A country that is highly prone to coups and political crises is not the best place to have nukes. Moreover, it's a misuse of funds. Pakistan has a pretty weak economy and much of the money the Pakistani government used to develop nuclear weapons could have been invested elsewhere. In contrast, India might not be the richest country but overall it still is wealthier and has a much stronger economy than Pakistan, so it has the money to develop nukes without compromising its development.
Ukraine and Kazakhstan technically had nukes, but they gave them to Russia as an agreement that Russia would not be military aggressive towards them... well look at Ukraine now
the "south island?" What island? Do you mean the Crimean Peninsula? Crimea (internationally recognized as part of Ukraine) has been officially annexed by the Russian Federation. It is NOT back in Ukrainian hands, far from it. Further, large sections of Eastern Ukraine have been under occupation by Russian or Russian-aligned forces, under the guise of a civil war, since 2014, notably including the large city of Donetsk, and previously Kharkiv. You apparently do not know what you're talking about.
which is why I said Donetsk is currently occupied and Khakiv previously was. I mentioned those two because they are both among the largest cities in Ukraine. Luhansk is smaller.
Well, no, they returned them to Russia. When Ukraine became independent the USSR no longer existed. Both the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR were constituents republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. So by the time the Ukraine was a sovereign nation, there was no USSR to return them to. They returned them to Russia, which was designated internationally as the successor state to the USSR. Apart from that, strictly speaking , Russia became independent of the USSR at the same time as Ukraine did.
Israel and Palestine: A perfect example of the heirs of two brothers (Isaac and Ishmael) in a constant feud over their inheritance and who is entitled to the spoils.
Not all Arabs descend only from Ishmael. According to the Bible, Abraham had six sons with his second wife, Keturah. Some scholars believe Keturah was actually Hagar whom he married after Sarah's death, but others believe she was a different woman. Although Abraham left everything to Isaac after he died, he gave gifts to his other sons before his death, and Isaac and Ishmael together buried their father. (Gen. 25:1-10) Also, Ishmael's daughter Mahalath was the third wife of Isaac's son, Esau, so it doesn't seem that the family was estranged. (Gen. 28:9) I don't know what the Quran says about Abraham's descendants. Maybe someone else here will answer that question.
There are several different religious traditions that hold Isaac was the progenitor of the "Jewish race" and Ishmael/Ismail the progenitor of the "Arab race." Muslims traditionally believe that Ibrahim took his son Ismail, fathered by his wife (not servant or concubine) Hagar, into the desert and there built a house for Allah, the Kabaa. They even say you can still see his footprints eternalized in the stone of Mecca, so they've got hard evidence .... of course in reality these stories are fairy tales without any basis in fact. The first Hebrews became a distinct ethnicity somewhere in the Levant some 3000+ years ago. "Arab" was a blanket term used to describe any of the desert-dwelling nomads who lived beyond the edge of civilization on the Arabian peninsula. Several hundred years after the Muslim conquest of the Middle East and North Africa, pan-Arabism became a thing and all these many different subjugated peoples started identifying as Arabs.
Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Ukraine also used to have Nukes. And under the NPT, Turkey, Italy, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands get Nukes belonging to other countries.
The sad thing is, these nations probably won't ever give up their nuclear weapons. There was a treaty a few years ago calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. Even though it had tons of support among developing countries, absolutely none of the nuclear powers or members of NATO (who support the nuclear capabilities of the US/UK/France) signed it. Just check out this map.
Is it a sad thing? look at how Pakistan and India are so careful not to go to war with each other having fought several major wars before acquiring nukes.
Would Russia have invaded Ukraine it Ukraine had held on to their nukes?
Nukes have proved to be a great way of keeping the peace. Of course the consequences would be horrific if something goes wrong.
As some have pointed out, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine, have all had nuclear warheads at some point according to your source. If these are included in the "countries that hold nuclear weapons under the control of another country" as mentioned in your caveat, I'd put them on the quiz grayed-out; I feel like it's a little unclear right now.
I took a tour of an old missile silo in North Dakota (a very remote part of the state, too!) and at the peak of the Cold War, if ND was an independent country, it would have had the third largest stockpile in the world, after the US and USSR.
BTW, it was really cool! For Cold War era kids, it is worth the journey! Cooperstown, ND - check it out!
It's an open secret that Israel has nukes, but the govt policy is to deny it and hold that diplomatic leverage, and there has been continuity in official policy.
Ukraine also had nuclear weapons after the soviet union collapsed but they gave it to Russia in return of expecting them to stay away from their land..
I was just spamming big powerful countries until I got it right
While Ukraine had physical control of the weapons, it did not have operational control of the weapons as they were dependent on Russian-controlled electronic Permissive Action Links and the Russian command and control system.
They should have kept the nukes.
Best solution to this problem would probably be to make it so NO country has nuclear weapons. They are too dangerous to keep around anywhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons
Scoring
You scored 10/10 = 100%
26.8% of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is 8
Your high score is 10
Your fastest time is 3:31
wow first try :>
Why would they want otherwise.
Would Russia have invaded Ukraine it Ukraine had held on to their nukes?
Nukes have proved to be a great way of keeping the peace. Of course the consequences would be horrific if something goes wrong.
27.7% of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is 8
Your high score is 10
Your fastest time is 2:39
27.7% of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is 8
Your high score is 10
Your fastest time is 0:15
And maybe put up a category with "speculated" to include Iran
BTW, it was really cool! For Cold War era kids, it is worth the journey! Cooperstown, ND - check it out!