Should people destroy all nuclear weapons?
Yes
Side Score: 33
|
 |
No
Side Score: 33
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely. They should not have been used anywhere at anytime, regardless of its "preventing power". The way I look at it is if humans can't handle guns properly (in terms of using them unwisely and unfortunately), then how can they handle the power of the sun? That's fucking ridiculous for humans to obtain such power. Think about it, if all of the nukes in the entire world went off strategically placed in bigger cities and populated zones, the world would be fucked. Side: Yes
Nuclear weapons have no purpose. You don't hunt food with them and you can't kill terrorists with them. Instead, you wipe out cities and become the terrorist. Once we develop working space elevators, I say we load up all our nuclear weapons and launch them straight into the sun. Seriously, we don't need them. Thorium nuclear energy is great, but uranium is just dangerous and unnecessary. Side: Yes
1
point
I think that all nuclear weapons have to be desrtoyed because firstly, it will make our world much safer, I mean that in case of war countries which have nuclear weapons may use it and then the whole mankind will be harmed and secondly there is no need in it because nowadays there is no preconditions for war, all political questions are solved through political discussions. Do you want to live in a fear that in any moment your life may blow up? Side: Yes
I think this is a good idea destroying nuclear weapons.Because of them countries are fighting . America is one of them .Now there is competition between America ,Iran ,Afganistan ,Japan and other countries because of nuclear weapons. They are very harmful for people, civilians get suffer from it............ Side: Yes
1
point
I take the view that all nuclear not just "should be destroyed", it must be destroyed. Of course, It is the greatest achievement in science, but unfortunately how it turns out it is out not for the benefit of humanity. It has so power, that can kills and turn to ashes. Government of countries such as Israel has to understand and cancel its using in war and in everywhere. Just remember the disaster in Japan in the past decades, and think one moment about it.......... Side: Yes
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
|
I would love to live in a world without nuclear arms, however that is just not possible. There are believed to be about 7000 to 9000 nuclear warheads around the world (mostly in Russia and the US). If one country vowed to destroy their nukes what about the other countries. If we destroyed them, we would more likely be attacked by a terrorist group or a country that stole them as we destroyed them. They would fire on us because they know there will not be MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) and we will be damned to destruction. Nice thought but very unlikely and potentially dangerous. Side: No
2
points
One does not simply, destroy nuclear weapons. In fact, one does not simply, dispose of nuclear weapons. Once they are created, they are a blight upon civilization. I believe the only way it would be possible to truly dispose of a nuclear weapon would be to break it down in the same way it was built. Like the need to toss the The Ring into Mount Doom, except that this is real. If you make a mistake with a nuclear weapon, you have an environmental disaster that is catastrophic. So no, we should not destroy our nuclear weapons. They should be sanctioned away someplace that no irresponsible power can access them. Side: No
1
point
Not entirely. It should be lessened only. The world still needs nuclear weapons in the case of emergency. There are still possibilities of extraterrestrials in which would cause aggression in our freedom. In response every disposable weapon should be at hand and be used wisely. There are multiple benefits for nuclear weapons, the human race just foolishly uses it to torture others. Side: No
1
point
1
point
I believe the term nuclear weapons means that a machine that uses nuclear energy in multiple ways. So meaning we can use the nuclear energy broth forth by nuclear fission for energy purposes. Thus it reduces the reliance to fossil fuels, thus being much more efficient. If further research is to be done, we might be able to make nuclear related machines safer and much more reliable. Side: No
|
