Nuclear Weapons: Your Opinion

[Indo-Malaysia]

Are Nuclear Weapons in your opinion, good or bad?

Nuclear Weapons, have brought up issues in the past, à la Tony Blair and in particular locations. I have mixed views about the topic. With them being a devastating, radiation-inducing weapon, that can leave large areas rendered uninhabitable for a long time, I oppose them. However, I feel it is necessary for nations to own these, as deterrents from others using it (MAD/Mutual Assured Destruction), thus making a Nuclear Attack less likely in theory.


What are your thoughts NSG?

[Alvecia]

Bad.
But as soon as one state has them it's necessary for others to also have them to retain the balance of power.

[Indo-Malaysia]

Bad.
But as soon as one state has them it's necessary for others to also have them to retain the balance of power.

Agreed. Damn you Nazi and American Scientists..

[Dooom35796821595]

Bad.
But as soon as one state has them it's necessary for others to also have them to retain the balance of power.

Agreed. Damn you Nazi and American Scientists..

And British, Russian, French, Chinese, South African...

[Unified Heartless States]

Good, most will die and radiation doesn't last nearly as long people believe.

More myth than really.

[The Grene Knyght]

Absolutely bad. their only purpose is to massacre civilians.

[Conserative Morality]

Terrible. They're imprecise weapons of mass destruction. There's no point to them except to make war bloodier.

[Indo-Malaysia]

Agreed. Damn you Nazi and American Scientists..

And British, Russian, French, Chinese, South African...

Petty Earthling Scientists..

[Mozambicar]

It depends completely on who has them. Nuclear weapons are good if used just as a deterrent of war or self defense. However if it is in the wrong hands, they can be used to massacre people, destroy cities, and wreck countries.

[Freefall11111]

Great. Nuclear states don't go to war with one another (or with one another's allies).

[Salvostella]

Good and bad are subjective terms.

[Dooom35796821595]

Terrible. They're imprecise weapons of mass destruction. There's no point to them except to make war bloodier.

Actually, Morden MIRVs are extremely accurate, to within a few metres.
And there don't make war bloodier, the opposite since there's no blood left.

[Indo-Malaysia]

It depends completely on who has them. Nuclear weapons are good if used just as a deterrent of war or self defense. However if it is in the wrong hands, they can be used to massacre people, destroy cities, and wreck countries.

If you were Kim-Jong Un, and wanted to blow up Seoul, would you do it in the knowledge your whole nation would probably be a pile of dust in a matter of minutes (Thanks to some Western nation)? With MAD, stuff like that shouldn't really be abused..

[Yugo-Austria]

They're great!
They uh, kill lots of people.
That's great!

[Greater Germania Reich]

Bad. If conventional warfare could still take place between rival nations could still take place the world would be a much better place. Our current way of waging wars is basically nothing but cold war era internal demoralization and political takeover of political parties and the state, and what's worse is that it's hard for the people themselves to even realize it's happening before it's too late.

[Vathya]

Nuclear weapons are bad and here are my reasons why.

1. It's kill everybody including citizens

2. If a nuclear war happens it will cause a nuclear winter making everything become extinct.

[Freefall11111]

If conventional warfare could still take place between rival nations could still take place the world would be a much better place.

By what metric? Or do you enjoy watching people die?

[Yugo-Austria]

Nuclear weapons are bad and here are my reasons why.

1. It's kill everybody including citizens

2. If a nuclear war happens it will cause a nuclear winter making everything become extinct.

What.

[Mozambicar]

It depends completely on who has them. Nuclear weapons are good if used just as a deterrent of war or self defense. However if it is in the wrong hands, they can be used to massacre people, destroy cities, and wreck countries.

If you were Kim-Jong Un, and wanted to blow up Seoul, would you do it in the knowledge your whole nation would probably be a pile of dust in a matter of minutes (Thanks to some Western nation)? With MAD, stuff like that shouldn't really be abused..

Exactly what I mean. The western countries use them as self defense. If North Korea nuked Seoul, they would be destroyed by the USA. But if the USA, say, didn't exist (I know, not having the USA changes everything, but let's set reality aside for a second.) then North Korea would destroy Japan and South Korea. Just like if Nazi Germany got a hold of nuclear weapons. They would nuke the USSR, Britain, and America.

[Indo-Malaysia]

If you were Kim-Jong Un, and wanted to blow up Seoul, would you do it in the knowledge your whole nation would probably be a pile of dust in a matter of minutes (Thanks to some Western nation)? With MAD, stuff like that shouldn't really be abused..

Exactly what I mean. The western countries use them as self defense. If North Korea nuked Seoul, they would be destroyed by the USA. But if the USA, say, didn't exist (I know, not having the USA changes everything, but let's set reality aside for a second.) then North Korea would destroy Japan and South Korea. Just like if Nazi Germany got a hold of nuclear weapons. They would nuke the USSR, Britain, and America.

Fair Enough. Just remember, Trident hasn't rotted away though

[The Untied Federation of Russia]

Bad....

Nuclear Weapons will be humanity's downfall.

[Vathya]

Nuclear weapons are bad and here are my reasons why.

1. It's kill everybody including citizens

2. If a nuclear war happens it will cause a nuclear winter making everything become extinct.

What.

Was there something confusing about my opinion?

[Godular]

Neither. They are inanimate objects.

[Mozambicar]

Bad. If conventional warfare could still take place between rival nations could still take place the world would be a much better place. Our current way of waging wars is basically nothing but cold war era internal demoralization and political takeover of political parties and the state, and what's worse is that it's hard for the people themselves to even realize it's happening before it's too late.

But then again, conventional warfare takes so much more lives than a nuke, and our new way of waging war effectively keeps many wars from happening between major countries.

[Indo-Malaysia]

Neither. They are inanimate objects.

So are its victims..