Would The World Be Better Off Without Nukes?

[Animal]

Originally posted by Yorick: And what of the underlying fear nuclear weapons caused our generation? WHat about that. The uncertainty of knowing that the whole WORLD could be destroyed at the touch of a madmans button. You don't think that every boy, girl, man woman and child, would sleep just that little bit easier if that fact was erased? If the perilous state of the planet was taken out of the equation. I'm not suggesting that people are quaking in their boots, nor that there wouldn't/aren't other fears more relevant in a persons life. However, I don't see how some can arguing that removing such a backdrop from peoples minds wouldn't be a better reality.

It's refreshing to see someone who shares my beliefs. I for one would much rather live in that world than this one.

[Night Stalker]

Well, Yorick, you're a little older than I. I was still terorizing the creatures in the back yard in the 70s and exploring the world on my bike in the 80s. So I can't put a perspective Cold War - even though I grew up in it. It couldn't be much different from the anxiety that I currently face in the possibility of being deployed, though. What you guys are talking about though wasn't the question. It was wether the world would be better with out nukes, and for the reasons I've stated, I don't think it would, there are too many other issues that need to be delt with.

Now as for the world you are hinting at. There is a world even better that I would rather live in. One that doesn't require me to pick up a weapon to defend myself, home, freedom, or countrymen. A world that does not seek to tear itself apart, destroy others ect. A world that lets everyone live and let live, without judgment or infringement.

So from that point I agree with you. But I also know that the city of Kubblakhan does not exist.

[ 01-08-2003, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: Night Stalker ]

[Chewbacca]

Just say no to Nukes. Nukes are Bad. mmmmmkay?

Hell yes the world would be better off with-out nukes.

Even trying to play devils advocate about the issue, one must still face the enourmous destructive potential of nuclear weapons coupled with the undesirable/immoral facets of human nature. I am suprised we have survived this long with-out an attack somewhere, after many nukes became unaccounted for in the former U.S.S.R.

Edited-oops

[ 01-08-2003, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[Rikard_OHF]

Originally posted by Animal: quote: Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: would be nice if everybody hd nuclear weapons but when a nuclear war really starts, the bombs dont work [img]smile.gif[/img]

Did you read this before you posted?
It would be nice if everybody had nuclear weapons????

I'm sorry, but no matter how hard I try, I can't understand the logic behind this.
What purpose exactly would everybody having nuclear weapons serve?
Some might say to deter war, but the better deterent would be common sense. Nuclear weapons have NEVER detered war whatsever. They may have stopped other nuclear powers from launching warheads, but that's a moot point if no one has them.
And just exactly what are we supposed to do with all these nuclear weapons that everybody has? Obviously they can't be used so....[/QUOTE]Everybody fears nuklear bombs
The USA feared russia coz they had nuklear bombs and vice versa
Never did one nuklear power dare fight another
now if everybody would have nuklear weapon nobody would dare attack
and if you had bother to read the rest of my post
would a nuklear war really happen and the bomb wouldnt work
that'd be great (relatively seen)

[Night Stalker]

Fear is not the road to peace. As Yorick pointed out, the Cold War was 40 YEARS of fear and tension and was the cause of numerous smaller scale proxy wars, nation building, assassinations, ect. Most of the proxy battles are unknown and classified. The Bay of Pigs very nearly sparked off nuclear war, fortunatly Moscow blinked. The Cold War really didn't end because attitudes changed all that much either. There are hard liners on both sides of the fence still today. It ended because the Soviet economy could no longer support it. No, while MAD (mutually assured destruction) is a deterent, the fear it generates is not a solution.

While I don't think the world would be better without the nukes, I certainly believe the world would be infinitely better without the need for nukes to have been invented in the first place.

[side note: all of the 20th centuries problems can be blamed on the French .... sorry Morraine - let me clarify - Napoleon]

Originally posted by Lavindathar: Recently, alot of people have said that they wish nuclear missiles were never invented. I think these statements are quite naieve, and that the people havent thought about them. I might be wrong. Ok, the reason I say this, is because, with the threat of nuclear war (although not one missile has ever been fired at a hostile target, yet....) people are blatently avoiding going to war. WW1 & WW2 would not have occured if both sides had nuclear missiles. They are such a big deterrant, that they are STOPPING wars rather than being a threat. Obviously I know nothing about this stuff, and I'm not saying that the above is my opinion, I'm just asking for people to debate so I can learn a bit more

Welcome to M.A.D. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Lavindathar]

I agree with Rikard more than anyone.

Some comments I dnt agree with.

1. Hitler, if he fired, you say would not have feared being retialited on. That would be IMMINENT defeat. Attacking with missiles is different from Nukes. He cant be defeated instantly, hence 5 years. As soon as the first nuke was fired, the war would be over within a fraction compared to what it was.

2. Fear is a deterrant. Why are people saying its not?

3. Nuclear Powers will never fire against another Nuclear Power. Ever.

4. I'll be surprise if a Nuclear Power ever fires against a Non-Nuclear Power.

And Yorrick, no I dnt think people would sleep easier without Nukes in the world. Ive never even dwelt on the fact they exist. And I doubt one will be fired in my lifetime. They are a deterrant. Not a weapon. And so far, as they havent been used (bar the A-bomb - which was a bomb, in a war!!!) I think that shows this.

[the sauceman]

Considering the way that the USA is heading under the Questionable Leadership of George W., Id say that there is a, if not good, then fair chance of a nuclear weapon being launched in our lifetime.
I am incredibly sorry that our nation got stuck with G.W. for our prez, and what the whole of the US has to go through with now that he is trying to "clean up" terrorism...

[slicer15]

When you think about it, everything that is created to do good, can be used for bad, or destruction. I am talking about inventions that were initially designed to help people but can also be used to kill people. I can't think of any examples at the moment.

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by slicer15: When you think about it, everything that is created to do good, can be used for bad, or destruction. I am talking about inventions that were initially designed to help people but can also be used to kill people. I can't think of any examples at the moment.

How 'bout hunting knives? Used for skinning game, and so on. Many times these have been used in murders and barroom brawls.