Originally posted by Bardock42
At least the US and the USSR are getting rid of some of their nuclear arsenal slowly (too slowly). In fact the US takes terrible care of theirs apparently, but no one really cares anymore. John Oliver of Last Week Tonight had a great segment on it:Whether you like the argument or not, it seems that most countries, and I think a fair amount of people, feel that we do not want nuclear weapons anymore, and one step necessary in that is to stop further proliferation of them. As far as reasons for doing things in international politics go, that's actually a pretty decent one, I think.
Unless we can develop weapons with a greater potency than nukes(something like anti-matter bombs), then I think that's a terrible idea, nevermind the fact that eliminating nuclear weapons even by a marginal amount like that already sounds unfeasible(to me, it appears more to be the case of the Americans being worried about their aging nuclear arsenal instead of just dismantling stuff for peaceful humanitarian causes).
Just think about it. In the previous century we had 2 world wars with a timespan in single digit years between them. Once nukes came into the picture, so did the concept of mutually assured destruction. Which has kept most of the world's major powers from tearing each others throats in a WW style. Sure, there are military skirmishes here and there, but definitely not on the same scale as the previous world wars.
WMDs maybe bad, but they prevent fascist regimes from becoming the National Socialist party 2.0. Even if via some miraculous event the world does eliminate all nuclear weapons by 100%, how does that prevent an emergent superpower like China(with its rapidly modernizing military and industrialized society) from attempting to break the international system and toppling it with its own, thereby starting the latest world war?