Should weapons of mass destruction be abolished thus releasing the world of their constant and annihilating threat?

  • Of course they should be abolished.

    Weapons of mass destruction are as much of a threat to the world as human beings are. These devices do not only harm humans they also harm the environment. There are people out there who do not care about the environment, but without humans would have no source of food due to there being fewer animals that would end up dying eventually and causing there to be no food. Weapons of mass destruction need to be rid of!

  • Of course! But, it would be almost impossible to do so.

    Biological,Chemical,and Nuclear weapons should all be internationally banned, (in my opinion,) however, it would an almost impossible task to do so, as some countries cannot be trusted. (North Korea, for example). On issues like these, you have to look at it as there are so many variables, so there is no really clear 'right way" to fix problems like these.

  • Certainly!!Weapons of mass destruction should be abolished

    While the mass killing of human beings is not a new feature of warfare, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) pose an unprecedented constellation of challenges to peace and security. Over the past century, various states have built and stockpiled lethal arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the materials to produce them. While states have officially committed to eliminating all stockpiles of chemical weapons and offensive biological weapons and to strive for the elimination of nuclear weapons, nine countries currently possess nuclear weapons - Britain, China, France, India, Israel (assumed), North Korea (claimed), Pakistan, Russia, and the United States – and several states are believed to possess chemical and/or biological warfare agents.

  • It is impossible

    Yes, it's a perfectly good theory, but it is flawed fundamentally in the fact that we cannot trust every country in the world. So what if while all weapons of mass destruction are destroyed, one country decides to either hide an existing weapon, or create a new one secretly. It's this problem that makes this idea impossible, as it is far too dangerous to rely on every country to keep their promise, with the tempting chance for power if they are the sole country in possession of a weapon of mass destruction.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.