Should Nuclear weapons be disarmed?
Debate Rounds (4)
According to http://www.fas.org..., "nuclear detonations are the most devastating of the weapons of mass destruction". It is of no use to use to keep maintaining the costs of possessing such a prodigious amount of power and it has brought nothing good to humanity whatsoever. What do you think about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki incidents? What about the current security dilemma between North Korea and South Korea, each threatening to use bomb the other? By abolishing them, we would actually save costs eventually.
Consequentially, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons would prevent environmental damage as well as an economic crisis as you've so unreasonably claimed. Disarming nuclear weapons would, in fact, require little to no costs at all by the government; rest assured, they could afford it hypothetically regardless.
pranmar123 forfeited this round.
If you are to disarm them, where would the waste go? It would make garbage fills and/or oceans far worse.
Upon disarming them, they are usually sent to nuclear power plants where they are converted into fuel rods and used to harness energy.
Nuclear weapons should be entirely disarmed because we live in a precarious era where a third world war is lurking behind every corner; doing the latter would at least attempt to inspire global peace or at least prevent a gargantuan amount of casualties in a future war.
Thanks for debating.
Again, you can't clandestinely develop a project based on nuclear weapon development as you will be crushed immediately by the rest of the world no matter how strong a country you are. They will be forced to disarm them, whether they like it or not, and at the first sign of betrayal, repercussions will be felt. They are also impeded by fear, not just honour; the U.S.A has received about 25 letters that contained severe war threats, yet nothing has happened. It seems as though we've become responsible and have realised the pandemically destructive effect(s) of nuclear weapons in general.
My final conclusion is that nuclear weapons are superfluous, redundant and pointless, serving no role whatsoever; not even in preserving world peace. In fact, by continuing to blackmail other countries in this way we'll soon get to a point where we'll actually do it; and from there on there on we won't be given a second shot.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.