Nuclear Weapons Programs, Should They be Banned ?

This is a discussion thread · 11 replies
1 2
Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, nuclear weapons have been detonated on over two thousands occasions for testing and demonstration purposes. The only countries known to have detonated such weapons are (chronologically) USA, Russia, UK, France, China, India and Pakistan. North Korea recently declared that it had carried out its first test of a nuclear weapon challenging the whole world who asked it not to. Also, various other countries may hold nuclear weapons but have never publicly admitted possession, or their claims to possession have not been verified. For example, Israel has modern airborne delivery systems and appears to have an extensive nuclear program with hundreds of warheads though it officially maintains a policy of "ambiguity". Iran currently stands accused by a number of governments of attempting to develop nuclear capabilities, though its government claims that its acknowledged nuclear activities, such as uranium enrichment, are for peaceful purposes.

Some would predict the start of the World War III due to this critical case between Iran and North Korea and the rest of the world, mainly with its first power, America.

Now, do think that other countries own the decision of developing such programs, be it for peaceful purposes or not ? Or that such programs should be banned ? and why.


New Member04
I think that every countries, which are working on a nuclear weapons program, should stop it and convert all their efforts in this field towards an useful nuclear program, that can be aimed to free us from petrol's usage. As a matter of fact scientists are working on "how to reclaim radioactive waste" but, sadly, the most of the money are spent for weapons research.
Contributing Member1,626
Retired Moderator: A moderator who has retired.
It just sounds stupid to me "Nuclear Weapon for Peaceful Purposes". Thats it.

regards
Full Member494
Francesca

Depending on Nuclear Energy as a source of power is very costly and completely dangerous, however, it might be partly used on generating Electricity. I totally agree with you in the last point. I recently read a horrifying statistic that points that Nuclear countries spend about $ 37 million every second on developing Nuclear Weapons programs.
JanissaryIt just sounds stupid to me "Nuclear Weapon for Peaceful Purposes". Thats it.

regards


It also sounds stupid to me. How did you come up with such thing ?
Unlike Janissary & Seto , i don't think that it sounds stupid, but it is a " catch 22 situation "

Nuclear Disarmament is not that easy to be done .

On the other hand, having nuclear weapons WOULD be one of the methods of national defence that enables the country to provide protection.


I will explain what i mean exactly and make it as clear as crystal .
First of all, Nuclear Disarmament is not that easy to be done ?

Let's suppose that nuclear weapons was banned [if possible ], which country or national force is qualificated enough to do this ?

I don't think any national force in the world , even the security council , is able to ban israel or the united states [for example] from having nuclear weapons, So theorizing more than needed doesn't solve our problems.

As a result, the countries in the world will be divided into two parts :

The superpower countries which have those weapons and the weak countries which doesn't have ,and the superpower countries will control the world.

That's why there should be some countries , which are against israel , have nuclear weapons . [ israel which call for Nuclear Disarmament is creating nuclear weapons increasingly ]

There should be a balance in the world, i mean the Security Council should do sth for this problem in order to create a state of balance in the world .

Actually i am not 100% with the idea of having nuclear weapons, but it is logical and possible as i mentioned above .

With Regards
Junior Member88
How sould an organisation like the
Security Council stop the production of
nuclear weapons? Nobody can, because
nobody has the power to do so. There are
enough nuclear weapons to extinguish the
earth several times. The only thing that can
be done is to hope that rationality will
prevail over the greed for power and
military or ecconmical leadership.
But I do not see the problem. Until 1991 the
world was just next to a nuclear war...
And also the usage of nuclear material for
the production of energy is in my opinion
not very sensible. It is too expensive to
get the waste away. The sun coud easily
meet our needs of power. But since the oil
industry is that powerful, there won't be any
reasonable researches.
Greez Dave
New Member15
Vaid² wrote the following post

< How sould an organisation like the Security Council stop the production of nuclear weapons? Nobody can, because nobody has the power to do so. There are enough nuclear weapons to extinguish the earth several times. >

This is exactly what i want to say , Nobody can ,as it is mentioned above in my post .
Anonymous:
No,nuclear weapons should not be banned as they provide much of the energy we need.For eg.it already produces 20% of the world's electricity.

From:AAQIB JAVED
Show more
Live chat
Registered users can join here