• Yes they should

    They are going to blow up the freaking world because if everybody launches nukes at each other than everyone on both sides will die also in 1 decade the united states spent 1000 billion dollars on nukes which they could have spent to disarm all the nukes so they sould be banned

  • They should be banned!

    The humanitarian case
    The abolition of nuclear weapons is an urgent humanitarian necessity. Any use of nuclear weapons would have catastrophic consequences. No effective humanitarian response would be possible, And the effects of radiation on human beings would cause suffering and death many years after the initial explosion. Prohibiting and completely eliminating nuclear weapons is the only guarantee against their use.

    Even if a nuclear weapon were never again exploded over a city, There are intolerable effects from the production, Testing and deployment of nuclear arsenals that are experienced as an ongoing personal and community catastrophe by many people around the globe. This humanitarian harm, Too, Must inform and motivate efforts to outlaw and eradicate nuclear weapons.

  • Rgfrefefewfesfewewfwefefrr r r r r e

    Rjjrurr rwehr eu re rer ehreu reur e rerher r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 3 er we we w ew ew e ew ew e w ew e we we e Because i said so

  • They kill peeps


  • Because nuclear weapons kill to many people.

    If we keep on using nuclear weapons the world would end.The nuclear weapons release a gas that would cut out our food supply then we will die out.If every country keeps on using nuclear weapons to attack other countries,then they would attack them,finally every one will start attacking each other until no one is left.

  • Yes they should

    They kill both soldiers and civilains."but with them we can destroy our enemys!" Our enemys have them as well so they can destroy us! Plus they cost a lot and the funds could have been used for other things. Ok? You get my argument now that im done? Good. Bye

  • Yes They Should

    If nuclear weapons would be banned throughout the world, and did not exist even illegally, there would be a millions of lives that wouldn't have gotten to waste. Nuclear weapons could be extremely harmful and cause mass destruction and kill innocents as these weapons are too strong and can go out of control very easily. This harms the nature and the environment around us. Not to mention, also takes lives of innocent people,also kills a lot animals which could affect the food cycle because of which the world would be a mess and would eventually get out of order. All nuclear weapons are good for is to create war.

  • Yes, they should.

    Nuclear weapons are a bomb waiting to go off, literally. They could start a world war. And end it even faster. The nukes are so powerful, they could destroy many countries very fast, and the way politics are going, it seems a few might be launched soon.

    That is my argument.

  • Yes they should be banned

    They should be banned as it harms millions of people and they even destroys the place where these are used and they causes harm to both countries between which the war is going on
    Since the use of these weapons cover a large area and cause harm to even small children which is seriously very cruel

  • Yes they should

    Imagine a war where both countries launch nukes on each other. Both countries will be destroyed. Pointless! A global ban would prevent global nuclear annihilation. Yes I know you think it prevents wars but without any weapons of mass destruction, you can't be threatened. If most countries are against nukes, any country that tries to rebel will be dealt with.

  • Nuclear weapons must not be banned

    Nuclear weapons must not be banned on a global scale because it being one of the factor why the countries do not attack each other, Due to the fear of a weapon of mass destruction.
    It makes small countries self existent and powerful, And erases the fear of being attacked by big countries.
    Nuclear weapon is a tool of mass peace instead of a tool of mass destruction! It can prevent an other world war.

    This is my argument

  • Atomic bombs do make us safe

    Everyone is scared to get into a war because they know these will be used. No that is not true some bombs do not come. Here is an example north Korea nukes the us the us will go to the united nations would punish north korea and would strip the leaders rank so they are safe

  • No they should not be banned on a global scale

    No nuclear weapons should not be banned on a global scale, because if we were to ban nuclear weapons there would be countries that will of course obey the new policy but again there's other countries that wont and therefor the countries that did respect the law would be defenseless against them

  • There's no enforcing it.

    No, nuclear weapons should not be banned on a global scale, because there would be no way to ever police that to make sure that nations obey it. It would lead to trustworthy nations, like England, Israel and the United States, keeping their promises, which North Korea and Iran had nuclear weapons anyways.

  • No, I don't believe nuclear weapons should be banned on a global scale.

    Nuclear weapons are likely one of the key forces that prevents major nations from attacking one another, I believe the threat of mutual destruction is enough to maintain peace between hostile nations, any rouge nation found using nuclear weapons should be immediately dealt with by the global community through the United Nations.

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

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.