Is nuclear strength the new criteria in determining contention for becoming a superpower?

Asked by: utsav_sejpal
  • Nuclear strength is the criteria to be a superpower

    Nuclear strength is the new criteria to be a superpower is true. Military assets, especially a nuclear arsenal is crucial for a country to play an influential role in global politics and global power. Countries like usa and russia have the worlds largest stockpile of nuclear weapons and thus are able to exert a certain influence over the world.
    Look forward to points supporting my stance !!

  • Not in the sense of amount

    Maybe having 10 is better than 1 for a country to be a superpower. But at a certain point you have enough to make the whole world extinct, and then more is really just vanity and bragging rights. So, nuclear strength is an either/or sort of thing, not an amount-based strength.

    Being a superpower is really in the end just vanity and bragging rights too. It would be better if our goal was just to be free and safe ourselves and the rest of the world's problems are just the rest of the world's problems. We should maintain bases around the world so we can go after threats to our interests, but that's all we should do. None of this messing around in Syria to save the poor civilians. The only purpose for our military should be our own national defense. Nothing else. The more we are just about defending ourselves the less we will unnecessarily antagonize nations and groups abroad and the more we can focus on real national security.

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