EDHS Contemporary World Affairs

AmericaFyeah · Veteran Member

U.N. Resolution aims at nuclear-free world

CurtisXavierBouyer · Veteran Member

I think we should give up are nuclear arms for world peace. In the end, world peace is more important and we dont use the warheads anyways. Whats the point in having them? It's worth it.

KamikazeBurger · Senior Member

Well if we get rid of all of the nukes we have from the cold war, that's cool, and if we really, REALLY need nukes again, we can just make them. I mean, in the cold war, they practically were mass produced, so we can make them again.

But another thing we have to think about is using nuclear power as an energy source. so in that perspective nuclear power won't completely go away

KingsFanAshley · Senior Member

World peace would be great, but let's face it, it will never completely be a reality. There are too many people to disagree on to big of a variety of things. However, a nuke-free world would create one less worry and could make us one step closer towards peace.

Kommandant_Karl · Guru

No of coarse we shouldn't give up our arsenal. Having Nuclear Weapons promotes world peace. Look at it this way: One guy fires off a nuke the other will drop it on him and so forth. I know this opinion won't be shared by all, but think about it.

WorldPeaceWorldWide · Member

I believe that in order to have a realistic chance at world peace no countries should be permitted nuclear arms. What a great step foward.

Vincevito13 · Veteran Member

umm to be honest i say that we should say we have no more nuclear arms but still actually have them just in case a country decides a war is needed. so basically just lie about it

DerChancellorJake · Guru

We need to keep our nuclear arsenal. As far as i am concerned, only nations with enough self control should posess them. Iraq has none, it will bomb the first chance they get. Also, nukes are not usually an offensive weapon, it is a defensive weapon. Mutually assured destruction means that if one nuke goes into the air, they all go. It ensures that no one will be attracking America because of fear of retaliation of being nuked back.

Mdparamo78 · Senior Member

If the world would to get rid of nukes there would not be world peace because if the world were to "get rid of its nukes" countries would just say they got rid of them and really just keep them in secret. And eventually one country would be found with them and conflict will start all over again.

DerChancellorJake · Guru

Stupid hippies... they don't want anyone to have nukes (even though nukes bring world peace) and they made us pull out of Vietnam. The soldiers out in the field need the full support of everyone at the homefront.

Kommandant_Karl · Guru

I again agree the with the supreme chancellor. The hippies caused more fighting than they did peace. Keep the nukes!

ashleyhebert8 · Senior Member

If nuclear weapons were eliminated from the world..it would obviously be a better place. But how are we supposed to know if another country is not hiding one? Every country would lie and say they don't have any and then stash them away somewhere. I am for the idea, but it is unrealistic. And if we were to eliminate nuclear weapons should we eliminate machine guns?

-- Edited by ashleyhebert8 on Friday 25th of September 2009 06:04:50 PM

DerChancellorJake · Guru

No, the world would not be a better place if all coutries got rid of their nukes. It is an integral part of our weapons arsenal, as well as a key defensive weapon. If we did get rid of our nukes, then many more countries would attack America without fear of nuclear retaliaton.

LegsMcgee · Veteran Member

if we disable all our nukes what is stopping countries like north korea form just attacking us while were unarmed

AmericaFyeah · Veteran Member

As much as I would love to live in a nuclear bomb free world, it can never happen. Once the first nuclear bomb was detonated over nagasaki the world changed forever. The time to use nuclear weapons would have been after japan surrendered. Once the soviet Union started thhe greatest arms race that mankind has ever known, the possibilty of a nuclear free world became a pipedream. Even if the major world powers destroyed their nuclear arrsonals, what is to stop a rouge nation from taking the world hostage? The world would undoubtabley be a safer place if nuclear bombs were not a option. I just dont think that can ever be a reality.

ashleyhebert8 · Senior Member

Well the question asked is if ALL countries didnt have nuclear weapons. So N. Korea would be 'equally' armed as us. But, we invest about 4 times as much as any other country in our millitary so we could kick their butttttttts.

citlallycontreras · Senior Member

yes i definatly think its worth it.. but in the end it could hurt us. i think we should get rid of most of the but not all of them, just in case. so i basically think we should lie ands say we got rid of them.

DerChancellorJake · Guru

Why would we lie about having nukes? That would just about be the stupidest thing that we could do. If people actually believed that we ditched our nukes, then they might nuke us. At that point, of course, our nukes would fly into the air. Obviously, this would cause much more deaths than if we just state it clearly and plainly "we have nukes and are not afraid to use them" greaty reducing the likelihood of being attacked to begin with.

meganorr · Senior Member

I think we're forgetting that NOBODY else would have them either, according to the plan. Or at least that would be the goal. Also. it doesn't say to magically get rid of the nukes over night it is a GRADUAL lessening, like that during the cold war. It is a good defensive strategy though, countries won't attack each other for fear of retaliation. But i think the point is not to have another incident like North Korea giving the world quite a scare a few months back.

jaquelynn16 · Senior Member

no i do not think this would be a smart decision at all. we would not be the 'America' that the world knows today if we didn't know how to defend ourselves. we cannot and should not give up our nuclear weapons, because there will never be world peace, it wont happen. there will always be someone wanting to get rid of some country, some race. there will always be war and fighting. and we should by no means give up our weapons, its just stupid. if we got rid of them, just think of the things one could do to America.

alison abuhamad · Senior Member

i definently think we should get rid of our nuclear arms i believe we have no use for them nor does anyone else.

jaquelynn16 · Senior Member

Kommandant_Karl wrote:

No of coarse we shouldn't give up our arsenal. Having Nuclear Weapons promotes world peace. Look at it this way: One guy fires off a nuke the other will drop it on him and so forth. I know this opinion won't be shared by all, but think about it.

i totally agree with that. getting rid of them just gives others countries a chance to attack us. this would just be stupid.

DerChancellorJake · Guru

I agree with everyone who thinks we should keep our nukes. How many wars were there, especially world wars, before be invented the nuke? A lot. How many wars have there been since we dropped the nukes on Japan? Only a few. Obviously, nukes bring peace.

meganorr · Senior Member

They don't bring peace, just fear.

Kommandant_Karl · Guru

Fear is what keeps the peace. If all countries are afraid the other will use their nuke in a counter attack, they won't use them. Keep the nuke and you keep the peace. "God created man, but Colt made them equal."

DerChancellorJake · Guru

Yes, Kommandant Karl is right. Fear is an excellent way of keeping the peace. As opposed to asking really nicely to play fair and hope everyone goes along with it.

Kommandant_Karl · Guru

Yea Chancellor Jake is correct in saying that I am correct. Personally as a country I would much rather be feared than loved.

meganorr · Senior Member

It does not bring PEACE though. It just brings, ok im not gonna attack anyone because i don't want to be attacked .that is NOT peace.

DerChancellorJake · Guru

But if one country is not attacking another country for fear of being attacked, then they are not attacking. And not attacking means it is peace.

Kommandant_Karl · Guru

Yes it is peace. No one attacks the other guy. Story over, problem solved.

meganorr · Senior Member

clearly we have different definitions of peace. to me, peace is tranquility and what not.

DerChancellorJake · Guru

Yes, we very clearly have different opinions. Mostly due in part to the fact that in today's world, there will almost never be tranquility. But there will be peace.