Amazon.com Widgets

Should every country have the right to possess nuclear weapons?

  • If the United States has them why the hell not?

    To me it's like owning a gun and then saying nobody else can have one. If the US and some of these other countries don't want Iran or North Korea getting nuclear weapons, then they should get rid of their nuclear programs too. It's hypocritical in my mind to have the nukes and then dictate to the rest of the world who can or can not get them. What fits the criteria of getting a nuke? I don't know about North Korea but the reason why a country like Iran is trying to get them is because their enemies the US and Israel have them. I've been stressing to my buddies that Israel is the strongest nation in the Middle East of course no to avail because of the alleged threat by the Iranian president( I can't spell his name) to blow Israel into the sea. I must remind everyone who has the nukes and who doesn't. Iran has to do this to protect themselves. But of course here in the West anyone that tries to defend themselves are the bad guys. In no way shape in form am I an Iran supporter, however if our country is going to sit up there and say that they shouldn't have nukes, shouldn't we get rid of ours. After all Iran has no nuclear weapons as of yet.

  • Equality and fairness.

    Only 9 countries today have nuclear weapons. That is not fair because no countries have the right to dictate to other countries that don't have nuclear weapons. It is not fair for the countries that don't possess nuclear weapons. The rich countries like the United States or Russia can not dictate to the countries that don't have the weapons. It is simply not fair!

  • Because some do, everybody else should.

    Let me emphasize "because some do". Having nuclear weapons should be banned everywhere, they're unsafe and don't help society, but who are we to decide who's smart or "good" enough to have them? If I was in North Korea, I'd stand my ground. Extreme times call for extreme measures. Their country, however much we may disagree with it, is being repressed and they should not just sit back and do as they're told.

  • No Nukes, or Nukes for everyone

    I do not like nuclear and hydrogen bombs at all, but let's face it. USA has nukes, Russia has nukes, India has nukes, China has nukes, Brazil has nukes, France and UK have nukes.
    And they want to prevent Iran from having nukes? Why on Earth? I don't see why one/a few country/-ies is better than the others, or how some countries could be certain to protect world peace but others are certain to cause nuclear war?!
    No. No nuclear weapons for anybody. If they don't want to get rid of them, than nukes for everybody.

  • Yes, they should...

    If all the nations in the world are to develop some form Nuclear Weapons they would ve well able to deter the larger oppressive powers on their on. Besides, everyone should have the right to do as they collectively wish they ARE humans too afterall, aren't they? And if this destroys us then I say let the nature take its course.

  • Of course

    By not wanting them to have nuclear weapons we are actually encouraging countries to not only pursue them, but to use them as a threat to establish their sovereignty. Of course the world would be safer without nukes, but you have to be realistic about this and it's too much of a hassle to try and stop countries from acquiring them.

  • Every country should have the right to possess nuclear weapons.

    I do believe that every country should have the right to possess nuclear weapons. If some countries have the right and some don't how is that determined? It is not fair for only some countries to be allowed to have them and some are not. Unless there is a great threat if they have one then they should be allowed.

    Posted by: barbiegirll
  • M.A.D

    Just look at the Mutually Asserted Destruction strategy. One country launches a nuke, the other does the same. It could stop there, but it won't because nuclear war will have been declared. Each country will keep firing nukes until both countries are wiped of the face of the planet. Now, what country would want to kill itself in order to kill another country? I can't think of one.

  • Yes they should; but not every country should possess it.

    First of all, the US did not use the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to wage war (which were the only times an atom bomb was used on the human race). The US used it in hopes that the Japanese will surrender rather having the US invade Japan, and wasting millions upon millions more of lives, on both sides. I do not like the idea of killing people that can't fight back, but the word would probably be under Japanese-German rule if it wasn't for the US decision of using the atom bomb to end the war.
    Now, every country should have the right to possess nuclear weapons because: 1) this enables the countries to advance their energy source, 2) they have a weapon that they could threaten other countries in case they threaten war on the smaller countries, and 3) why should the US be the only one to carry the rights of having a nuclear bomb? its the same as saying, i should be able to carry firearms in a bad, crime infested neighborhood, while my neighbor shouldn't be able to, just because I was the first one to possess arms, and I was the first one to use it. Imagine yourself in that neighborhood's position. You have a wife and kids, now relate that to countries. The country can use that weapon to defend their country, and every citizen in that country.

  • All or none is a good approach

    As long as some countries have nukes and others don't, the world will be more unstable than it would be if all of the nations had nukes or none of them did. When every country has a nuke, nobody will fuck with anybody else. In a way, it might be our best bet at world peace.

  • Nukes are nothing but trouble

    Nuclear weapons are a serious threat to the entire world. They are the worst guns that have ever been created by humans and no country should be allowed to possess them. Nuclear Proliferation Treaty demands for all states to renounce their nuclear ambitions and for the states that have nukes to get rid of them. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US was essentially a world referee that would call out the states that didn't comply with the rules of NPT. We condemned India, Pakistan, North Korea and Libya, when they were pursuing nuclear weapons. Most recently, we have been demonizing Iran for their enrichment uranium program. However, in order to retain credibility as a referee, the United States must stay loyal to the principles of NPT that it helped to establish.While we condemn Iran for developing nukes, we never said anything to Israel. Israel never announced that they have nukes, however, everyone knows that they do. Israel denied any access to its nuclear facilities and refused to cooperate with IAEA on its nuclear sites. The Iranians and others see that and take notice. While in theory NPT applies to everyone, there seems to be a double standard, which, of course, diminishes our credibility in the world. Everyone must obey the same rules without exceptions. US can't allow Israel to be exempts from international rules, just because Israel is "our buddy." Let me put it into context. If you are a referee and you allow one of your friends to ignore rules of the game, how do you call that? Cheating...

  • Who holds the world's nuclear warheads? Get the full list by country http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/dec/13/north-korea-nuclear-weapons

    What a silly debate with silly opinions. The only countries that can ban nuclear weapons and enforce the ban are the USA, Russia, and China. Thankfully, we have the United Nations to impose sanctions. If push comes to shove, it will be the USA that enforces the rules. Russia and China actually want most of the countries that are against the USA to have nukes because those countries will try to kill Americans and Jews.
    =============================================================================
    Allowing everyone to have nukes is insane and can only hasten them being used, especially by radical Islam countries in the Middle East. Jihad is about destroying all non-Muslims, and if these folks get nukes they will definitively use them. Iran needs to be taken out now! Korea needs to be taken out on the same day!
    =============================================================================
    “The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.”
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm
    ====================================================================
    For some idiot to say, it is like owning a gun. If I can own a gun, you should be allowed to own a gun. The ignorance of many folks at this site does not cease to amaze me. All wars and weapons should never have happened! Amazing! Man is an aggressive animal; our first weapons were stones and clubs. Whoever had the biggest rocks and clubs won until the bow and arrow or sword were invented; then came gun powder and guns. Now we are at nuke stage.
    ===========================================================================
    Despite the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons treaty (NPT), which was not signed by India, Israel and Pakistan, and the efforts of the United Nations, nukes will be used again. I just hope the USA has the most advance technology.
    ================================================================================
    Data on the number of nuclear weapons is notoriously difficult to find. Almost 2,000 of the roughly 4,400 deployable warheads are in a state of high operation alert (2,150 USA, 1,800 Russia, 290 France, and 160 UK). Other nuclear warheads, 2012 – Russia has 8,200; USA has 5,850; China 200; Pakistan 100; India 90; Israel 80; UK 65; and France 10. Russia has approximately 7,350 warheads in reserve or awaiting dismantlement. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/dec/13/north-korea-nuclear-weapons
    ================================================================

    The nukes will be used again. I hope America and its allies survive. Nobody knows what will happen to the earth if hundreds or thousands of nukes are exploded over a few days. I am not optimistic that human life on earth will survive. America needs to continue spending hundreds of billions on weapon advancement and defense annually; but, we should pull most of our troops out of the Middle East; but, we should maintain all are air and Naval bases.

  • Muslim brotherhood controlled countries should not be allowed nuclear weapons.

    Countries under the control of the Muslim brotherhood should not because they have already used what little they have to send their children strapped with bombs to attack Europe and the USA. If they had nuclear arms the world could very well end because unlike the Russians the Muslims don't "love their children too". Islam is not a race by the way it is an ideology like Communism is an ideology and Nazism is an ideology. Islam is political right wing extremism.

  • America the Beautiful

    Other countries hate Americans because America is the superpower. America already gives every other country everything they need, why should America allow others the opportunity to rise with nuclear weapons? Now, America needs to get rid of Obama to actually move "forward." If Obama had it his way he would get rid of all of the nuclear weapons and let every other country rise against America. What an idiot. Why would you want all that power as a president just to crap on the idiots that voted for you?

  • Every country should not have the right to possess nuclear weapons.

    I do not think that every country should have the right to possess nuclear weapons. I think that nuclear weapons should not be allowed for any nation unless authorized by the UN to have them and that we should stop the development of new weapons. Reaching a "stalemate" because nuclear weapons are owned my many countries does nothing to help drive peace globally.

    Posted by: SilverMathi
  • We barely survived the Cold War - don't start an Ice Age war!

    The Cuban Missile Crisis nearly caused a nuclear weapon exchange and possibly the death of millions. There are now more nations with nuclear weapons, including Pakistan, India, France and possibly Israel. There are also more rogue states that may use such weapons, including Iran to eliminate "the Zionist threat" they see in Israel for merely existing and Al Qaeda against the infidels. If every nation had a right to nuclear weapons, all the minor conflicts in the world could erupt into nuclear war. We should seek to disarm all nuclear weapons, not give a universal right to possess them.

    Posted by: Pir4And
  • Religion

    Think about people whom are anxious for Infidels to meet their maker. Problem is, it is only the belief of certain fanatics that is taught at a young age who is right and who needs to go. Some people are all to much in a hurry to meet their God.
    am in no hurry, so please don't say that everyone should have a nuke.

  • No justification with these weapons

    No country has the right to owning weapons capable of destroying millions of lives in the blink of an eye. WMDs should not exist, they only lead to intimidation, which leads to war, which causes more death. There is no situation where a nuke can be fully justified, our world would be better off without them

  • No No Nukes

    In my opinion our world should be free, not only should other countries not have nukes but neither should America, I mean why do we even need them, it isn't like other countries should launch nukes at us! Why is such a destructive weapon nuke needed, next nuclear bullets could be made, it is just annoying

  • Responsibilities of Countries

    Egyptian citizens are rebelling against the government right now. If all of a sudden the government of Egypt got nuclear missiles, the results would have been catastrophic. There are other countries like North Korea who guard the DMZ alongside UN forces. If North Korea got their hands on weapons as well, they could launch a war on the USA. Although the US killed thousands of people in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing, we have never used another atom bomb ever.

    Also, irresponsible countries could destroy Earth, killing everyone. No one would like to live a fate of nuclear war. During the Cold War, the USSR was delivering supplies to Cuba, and set up a military there. They could attack the US without the US knowing. Thankfully, JFK made the Soviet Union take the military supplies back. If not, then the results could've ended the US as we know it.


    For these reasons, I think that nuclear weapons are very fragile, and should only be given to responsible countries like the USA. If in the wrong hands, who knows what could've happened?


Research this topic: Iran, United States, Barack Obama
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-03-19T18:08:43.060
If the us have the right to have nuclear weapons so should all. I know its powerfull and destructive but every country has the right to use the nuclear weapon as defence.
Anonymous says2013-03-26T19:42:49.063
We should be able to have nuclear weapons as long as we don't destroy each other.