DEBATEitOUT.comDebate online with people!

Sovereign nations should be able to develop whatever weaponry that they wish to develop.

It is when those nations use that weaponry in an evil manner against other nations that the international community should gather together and smack them down, not before.

Arms limitation treaties only weaken the strong and falsely strengthen the weak, and that my friends is much worse than the prospect of a small nation trying to wipe out a neighbor.

And who will disallow them, pray tell? The idea that only America and her allies should be "allowed" to build and own nuclear weapons is silly- especially since said America is the only nation to ever actually use nukes.

Jared, the U.S. should not be the worlds police force. Neither should the United Nations. Your statement above is just plain wrong!

I agree with PapaDawg. The United States shouldn't be the world's police force.

Personally, I don't think ANY country should be developing any nuclear weapons, including the United States. Especially considering that the U.S. is the ONLY country to have ever used one against another country.

However, there are other countries out there that have some crazy people running them and they would be stupid enough to use them if they had them so they shouldn't be developing them either.

But as far as saying, they should not be ALLOWED to….c'mon, seriously, who is going to stop them? The United Nations? Hardly. The United Nations would be lucky if they could stop a apple from falling from a tree. What's my point? They are useless. Uuuuuuuseless.

We don't need nuclear weapons,chemical or biological weapons or any other weapons of self-destructions because spending all our energies and resources and intelligence in building weapons of mass destruction can only end in the complete and total extinction of all life on this planet and it is very sad that a majority of the world is impoverished yet we spend billions on endless wars where one man blindly kills another for land,oil or whatever it is that humans consistently fight over without the slightest thought to the fact that human life is the most precious and priceless of all things on this planet and l hope that soon we can all wake-up from this madness of wars,death and destruction because we are living in a nightmare created by our fellow human beings who are willing to kill others to satisfy their own selfish and ugly desires,lacking in compassion and love for their fellow human beings for at the end of the day every human being has a right to life, justice,peace,freedom and well being.We need to evolve,we need a more humane society.Lets be more enlightened in how we look at and deal with the world around us as at the end of the day there is only one humanity and those thousands of nuclear weapons we possess can only be used against ourselves,how radiculous and mindless can man be?

you know what would be really bad? An anti-matter bomb. "Vatican city will be consumed by light"

How about a “It Doesn’t Matter Bomb”.
So nothing would matter.
“I’m melting………..but it doesn’t matter.”
“Excuse me…..but…….Your hairs on fire”
“No worries……….It doesn’t matter.”

Yes!!! Even the Yanomami’s should have one!

However, I think theirs would be the most cruelist.

When it explodes red ants and maple syurp would rain down from heaven.

@Humanitarians

Great Punctuation! It’s nice to see so many full stops and such clear English.

Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), every country does have a right to nuclear development for peaceful purposes (i.e. nuclear energy). The fear is that countries may use this as a guise for weapons development. This is what the Bush Administration has been concerned about in the Iran example.

More fundamentally, if (as also noted further above) powerful countries, such as the US itself, are pursuing nuclear weapons options (defying various nuclear non proliferation treaties in the process), this raises arguments that many have made in the past, such as:

•Surely others have a right to develop nuclear weapons as well?
•Why should only a few powerful countries have them?
•Won’t they use their position to pressure or bully other countries to their interests?
North Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel, for example (and possibly Iran, depending on how things progress) would seem to directly or indirectly support these questions for their own interests.

The right to nuclear weapons will be an attractive argument for those who feel threatened by the current world powers, or for those with more ambition. Furthermore, the world’s foremost nuclear powers appear unwilling to provide sufficient help. Some, such as the US, appear to reverse and actually develop more weapons, citing reasons such as fear and mistrust of others.

In that context, it would be hard to argue against other countries also demanding such terrible weapons. The US may even find it will have to accept that others will want nuclear weapons too, as they will recycle these same concerns, often back towards the US, adding the charge of hypocrisy if the US opposes them.

Perhaps in the ideal sense most citizens in the world would like to see all countries give up their nuclear weapons, but in the world of real-politik, that would seem suicidal. The arms race fear seems hard to avoid.

For countries such as the US that wish to dissuade others from pursuing nuclear weapons development, a negotiated approach that is also backed by real commitments where powerful countries live up to their parts of nuclear non proliferation treaties would go a long way towards achieving a more agreeable and peaceful future. But to achieve this requires an almost colossal shift in foreign policy and requires such a level of friendship and trust between countries currently opposed to each other, that it is hard to see if this can ever happen.

Ironically then, the need for international “stability” will be used as an argument both for the reduction in nuclear weapons, and for their proliferation.