Submitted by lamberto s. lopez, md, Oct 4, 2007 06:21
His argument shows his lack of overall knowledge of human ideology. We and other countries like France, England, Israel, have these weapons for defensive deterent reasons.
Even if all nations agree to denuclearalize, history shows mankind always assautled its weaker especially richer neighbor. War with conventional weapons will eternally be with humanity . The thought of total mutual annihilation with nuclear weapons definitely deter other less Moral countries and terrorist like iran, n. korea, maybe russia from actually starting a war. If we did not have these A-Bombs, conventional war with conventional weapons would not had deterred russia from conquering us and other rich western nations.
I am sure that next time iran attacks Israel via its proxy terrorist hezbollah and syria, Israel will no longer respond with conventional weapons and I think iran/syria is getting the message. I am sure al-qaeda everywhere, especially where they are concentrated like the waziristan province of Pakistan are aware that if they attacked us with nuclear weapons, they risk total annihilation.
Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.
Other reader comments on this article
Comment
By
Date
What is better: nuclear—free world, or political calculations? We passionately teach other nations how to live, while ready to reduce... [MORE]
Vilen Khachatryan
Nov 9, 2007 18:09
I think that if anybody in this world can tackle and resolve these issues, it is most definitely Barack Obama.... [MORE]