@9FQXV5S 7mos7MO
I feel living in fear behind walls and deterants only isolates and produces more fear rather than trust and open communication.
@9FT8G7G7mos7MO
The nuclear deterrent, through the principle of MAD, has seen the most peaceful period in human history. To get rid of it would be foolish as rogue states and foreign enemies certainly won't, its an idealist fantasy that would, in reality, simply leave us on the poor end of a massive power imbalance.
@9FTN86P7mos7MO
We live in a world full of authoritarian regimes that will always push boundaries. A nuclear deterrent is a tool that all regimes understand. The consequences of mutually assured destruction is taken into account by any nuclear power. It’s a great thing for a country to have. I bet Ukraine wishes they had kept one now, seeing how little the West is prepared to do to protect them from Russia.
@9FV7P9Y7mos7MO
While the idea that nuclear deterrence fosters fear and mistrust is valid, proponents argue that such arsenals actually maintain strategic stability by making the cost of initiating conflict unacceptably high for all parties involved. This deterrent effect can also provide leverage in diplomatic negotiations and contribute to regional security, potentially reducing the likelihood of both nuclear and conventional conflicts.
@9FTPH9JConservative7mos7MO
Because if our main rivals (Russia) have them we need to support our allies in support of the sanctioning and the unlikely event of war. We have more nuclear weapons combined so we may be able to force a surrender.
@9GDWPDV6mos6MO
Nuclear weapons, if used, would result in massive death and destruction across masssive areas and possibly global extinction. Even if they aren't ever used, the idea of a select few rich countries having powerful weapons that can destroy the planet means that they can potentially strong-arm weaker nations into following their orders.
@9FJS7LTConservative7mos7MO
There is no guarantee the nations we encourage will ho through with dismantling their nuclear weapons so in an act of being ready to defend our nation by any means necessary we should have weapons that make the potential enemies fear.
@9J482H4 3mos3MO
The biggest piece of data that supports the removal of nuclear weapon programmes is that potentially in the event of a nuclear war, 360 million people (Innocent men, women and children) would be killed directly. More than 5 Billion people would likely die because of the aftermath. That is basically the end of the world.
The historical activity of users engaging with this answer.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
