Do we need nuclear weapons?

CannoedGerbil

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Messages
34
Location
Birmingham, UK
After reading through the thread by winner about Iran and watching Hiroshima on BBC1 yesterday I got thinking do we really need them? One of the reasons for keeping them is so you never have to use them, and if you don't really want to use them what's the point in having them?

Most of the time there presence only makes bad situations worse. The disputes between Pakistan and India are only as bad as they are because both sides are nuclear powers and the threat of nuclear retaliation is always present. China has said they would be willing to use nukes if there was any effort for Taiwan to secede. The UK and US have also said repeatedly they would be willing to use nukes in certain situations.

For those who think we should keep nukes, do you think other countries should get to build them? Is it every countries right to have a nuclear arsenal? Or should there be requirements like the country being a democracy?

Or do you think every country should dismantle their nuclear weapons? So far the only country to do this to all their weapons is South Africa, should we follow their example?
 
Yes, we do need them. Nukes are what kept the USSR from flattening us during the cold war, and they are a usefull deterent against any possible aggressors. No one will invade you if you have them. Eventually a counter will be devised aginst them and is probably being designed as we speak. But until then nukes wil be usefull.
 
The problem i see is we cant get rid of all the nukes, some countries would say STFU and just build more, and end up being a world power. However, in an ideal world, i would like to see no nukes. They simply are to powerful and destructive to be in the hands of a crazed leader with a grudge against another country.
 
Evil Tyrant said:
No one will invade you if you have them.

The fag terrorists kicked you Americans your eggs, but I didn't see no report of a nuke blowing in Iraq/Afghanista... :mischief:
 
GeneralZed said:
The fag terrorists kicked you Americans your eggs, but I didn't see no report of a nuke blowing in Iraq/Afghanista... :mischief:

Then again, we Americans who got kicked in the 'eggs' didn't want to kill millions of innocents. Just because a few crackpots attack us does not give us the right to annihilate an entire nationality of people, and then make the land unusable for decades to come.
 
GeneralZed said:
The fag terrorists kicked you Americans your eggs, but I didn't see no report of a nuke blowing in Iraq/Afghanista... :mischief:
Neither of those countries went to war with america. Amercia went to war with them, invaded, and now is trying to get out of there. It would be different if foreignh troops attacked america. And china is where my money is on for the first nuke to be launched from.
 
GeneralZed said:
The fag terrorists kicked you Americans your eggs, but I didn't see no report of a nuke blowing in Iraq/Afghanista... :mischief:

Iraq and Afganistan didn't invade us, we invaded them. Although if I was in charge, lets just say Mecca would be the holiest pile of ruins in the world. :nuke: :nuke:
 
GeneralZed said:
The fag terrorists kicked you Americans your eggs,
They were gay? Makes no sense. Why would they want to knock down two giant phallic symbols?
but I didn't see no report of a nuke blowing in Iraq/Afghanista... :mischief:
Look, what grown men and women do behind closed doors in those countries is none of our business:nono:
 
Having nuclear weapons scare (or otherwise encourage) other nations into acquiring the same. The devices serve no other purpose.
 
johnnymiller said:
nuclear weapons can't be 'uninvented' so i'm afraid we're stuck with them.
But they can certainly be dismantled, with a UN economic pact encouraging nations to do so.

For example, lets say the UN taxes every nation $1bn/year for each ICBM and $5ml/year for each additional warhead - then see how many nations want to develop or maintain nuclear weapons!
 
I do not want to get too deeply into this but nuclear weapons are the only thing that (for now) prevents a global war of the (super)powers.... we have to rely on their wisdom not to use them, because once done nuclear weapons cannot be undone. We all know why...
 
stormbind said:
But they can certainly be dismantled, with a UN economic pact encouraging nations to do so.

For example, lets say the UN taxes every nation $1bn/year for each ICBM and $5ml/year for each additional warhead - then see how many nations want to develop or maintain nuclear weapons!

Only one problem with that fun idea - enforcement. Enforcement is the key to any descision, so it would be wise to think over if you can actually do what you want to do.
 
stormbind said:
For example, lets say the UN taxes every nation $1bn/year for each ICBM and $5ml/year for each additional warhead - then see how many nations want to develop or maintain nuclear weapons!

That would achieve only thing, and that is numerous nations leaving the UN.
 
There would be no need for them to leave the UN. After they were done laughing, theyd call Security and have them drag the crazy homeless guy who made the suggestion out of the building.
 
Yes, we need them. I mean we Czechs. That's why are we secretly developing them in our Temelin nuclear plant. Austrians have told you, but nobody listened to them. Now, nothing can stop us :satan: We are going to have our revenge :bump: :nuke:

;) :D

Honestly, I don't know what to say. Nuclear weapons are simply there and we must deal with it. Let's focus on making a mechanisms, which will make the nuclear war less possible. These weapons serves only for MAD purpose, they cannot be used in war like any other weapon.

At least while Bush has a bit of sane mind in his head.
 
We should not need them to prevent war, but in reality we do. Hopefully they can be substituted with wisdom anytime in the future.

@Winner
We have Arnie to crush your evil plans... :D
 
Perhaps we do have to keep some around. But, say, 10,000 for the USA is a bit of an overkill...
 
Back
Top Bottom