Asf jdsknasjfnjas lnjdnaknaskf naknasjn kfnadkj nfkjdan kj nkj ajdasjdasj da ds s s ss s s s s dsds ds d sd asd as sa sd s sd das as d as das das das d ass dasd s ds asd asd asd qs das asd as das das sdasd
Yes, we should eliminate nuclear weapons. They are too dangerous to use even as a deterrent. The consequences of nuclear war would be catastrophic for humanity. All nuclear weapons should be dismantled and destroyed so that they cannot be used even as a last resort. To use them is to risk the annihilation of the planet.
Nuclear weapons remain the most potentially devastating devices in the world's military arsenals. The use of even one of these weapons would have truly devastating and, some would argue, disproportionate consequences. For these reasons, the leaders of nuclear nations should work to eliminate this type of weaponry. In order for a program of eliminating nuclear weapons to be effective, all so-armed nations must participate in the process. Moreover, no non-nuclear countries must be allowed to gain these types of weapons.
Holding nuclear weapons just creates a cold peace between nations; everyone knows if they are used, they could destroy all life on Earth. It would be better if all nations agreed to eliminate them and stick to weapons that cause much less destruction. There would still be wars, but the threat of mass extinction would be eliminated.
Yes, we should eliminate nuclear weapons. The collateral damage they create is not worth the problems they solve. They destroy their detonation zone, and large areas around it, for decades. They destroy useful infrastructure, the natural environment and kill innocent civilians. Nuclear weapons detonations also cause individuals outside the immediate radiation zone to contract cancer and give birth to children with large amounts of health issues that become a government-spending nightmare in post-war economies that can't afford it.
Nuclear explosions can be utilized for other purposes besides warfare. Megaengineering projects tht call for the movement of large amounts of earth/land and Nuclear Rockets as propulsion for spacetravel are two examples that come to mind. Aside from these, there may come a day where a threat arises where the only possible responsible that would be effective would be to use a nuclear weapon. Can the currentl stockpile of nuclear weapons be reduced? Sure; but they should never be eliminated entirely.