Whats your position on nuclear weapons?
100632
Hair breadth from utter destruction- too many close calls\n\nOn October 27, 1962, a Soviet submarine officer named Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov reportedly refused to comply with the launch of a nuclear warhead while apparently under attack by a U.S. warship near Cuba.\n\nSeptember 26th, 1983 - Colonel Stanislav Petrov disobeys protocols and fails to launch Soviet Missiles after his early warning system indicated 5 missiles launched by the US at the Soviet Union.\n\nJanuary 25, 1995 - A peaceful scientific rocket is launched off the coast of Norway. To the east, in Russia, radar operators mistake the launch for a nuclear attack by the West. A deadly process -- nearly on auto-pilot -- is triggered. Within minutes President Yeltsin has been alerted of the attack. For the first time in history, the Russian nuclear briefcase is activated.\n\nI believe they're a necessary evil, especially in this age of rogue states and leaders.  The nearness to calamities, however, from false alarms makes them scary, and these are only the enemies false alarms, i wonder how many US false positives there have been since 1950.
871662
I say prudent. But I would take it a step farther and build a bomb shelter too. Nuclear war is around the corner. All the land, gold and guns in the world won't save you from that...
489764
I do.\n\nNo Country has the Moral Authority to prevent another from producing Nuclear Weapons, unless those who already have it are willing to destroy them.\n\nDouble standards just because you are powerful is a shame !
418560
I wholeheartedly agree with you mate, I live in England and am of English parents. It seems the United States have set themselves up as the nanny of the world despite the fact they are responsible for some of the worst atrocities outside of of the 3rd Reich. Anyone that doesnt agree with their world view is seen as an enemy of america and therefore a terrorist, saying this your President seems very hardline and I can understand the objections to you having nuclear capabilities at this time.
880890
England is entitled to its Nuclear program in my opinion because it was a part of the Great three in WWII.  I dislike Iran getting ahold of the nuke because of the numerous middle east wars and a country like that would not hesitate a first launch.
851503
Hmm lots of John Waynes and nukers here and I am glad there are still realists around.\n\nI should assume the potential threats to be :\nIran - which will immediate compromise your military deployment in iraq and Afganistan,\nKorea - where 50,000 American troops will need to be reinforced\nfrom Japan\nTaiwan - if China decide to lay claim finally\n\nThe US have the technological and military hardware for a short term response but will not withstand the attrition for the mid-term. There can't be nukes used in consideration of the neutral countries or reluctant allies.\n\nWhen the trouble start, the US will not be able to last if China decide to swing in with the other sides.\n\nNothing you can do except surrender your overseas interests and like in isolation just like before Pearl Harbour. THE US will be impregnable once your military hardware is confined within your homeland.
1134141
I feel they have every right to self defense just as any other country in the world.  Remember, the US isn't one to police the world in terms of nukes.  The US is the only country that has ever used it as a weapon in war time. No other country has.  The US is just another landmass on the map.  If one country can have mass killing weapons, then everyone else has the right to defend themselves as well.
527009
Good job buddy, now the goverment knows you are looking for AK57s.. why dont you ask: how to build a nuclear weapon? next time.. haha
481813
Why should the US be the only ones to have nukes in the first place?  Our president wants to claim everyine else is out to use them, when the fact of the matter is that our country is the only one in the world to have actually used them in a war situation.  In my eyes, I see our world as one.  And if one country on the map is allowed to have nukes to defend themselves, then so should everyone else.  We are just another country.  Just another land mass on the map.  Yes, we have more than others, but we also are more arrogant.  I can vouch for that, since I can be pretty stuck up at times.
566166
Wrong Buddy. Remember you have some crazy people who will do anything to get a nuke in their hands. Anyone from terrorists, to warlords. The civilized world, notice like the US, France, Britain, and so forth, use their nukes as a deterrent. You know u nuke me, I'll nuke you back. Crazy countries like Iran just wants nukes to WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!! So therefore, it is in the best interest of the civilized world that certain countries contain and hold nukes.
244806
If that were the case does it give India, Pakistan, Isreal and all the other nuclear powers the right to attack us because we have nuclear weapons - I think not.\n\nAnd who are we to dictate to other countries whether they should have nuclear weapons or not.  We expect the world to accept that it's OK for us to have weapons but then have the hypocricy to condemn other countries who acquire or want to acquire them.\n\nTo my mind it would be much better if no-one had them.
253675
Nukes.  That way we don't loose any Americans and the enemy dies
645601
Maybe I can help here. If western democracies have nuclear weapons, that's a good thing and helps towards world peace and stability. If anybody else has them, obviously that's a very bad thing and leads towards armed conflict and Armageddon. Except for Israel, naturally.\nI hope this has cleared up a difficult area of international geo-politics.
691733
askwrites is an idiot.  In an ideal world that would work, but in an ideal world no one would make nuclear weapons to begin with. \n\nTrue the U.S. is the only country that used nuclear weapons, but do the research and the study. There were many lives saved on both sides by doing so.  An invasion of Japan would have cost millions of lives on both sides. Also, we did not know about the fall out from nuclear weapons was so bad. \n\nPersonally, I don't think any group should be able to build nuclear devices. That's one of the responsibilities of the U.N. I just wish that other countries would step up and do things about the injustices in the world other than the U.S.
67954
There is a fine line between nuclear energy and nuclear WEAPONS.  Energy will benefit everyone greatly until a meltdown of course.  However researching nuclear energy and experimenting with it leads to some bad people having volitile materials which COULD BE used for a dirty bomb or full out nuclear weapon.  To answer the 2nd part of the question.. what do you THINK the US will do to stop them?  We will warn them once, ask the UN and get denied, then take matters into our own hands.  I vote move to Canada.
804668
My dearest Iran,\n\nThank you for your words, though I must express my doubt as far as any undo criticism.\nI understand you need an alternate fuel and energy source just as we do, and would ask for your patience, if not cooperation, in obtaining a standard in which, we, the world can all readily accept as viable and safe and not worry about using it as weapon stock.\nWhy don't you come over here, sit down at my table, and enjoy a glass of wine, some United States made cheese, and we can discuss the reasons we are so paranoid of each other.\nIn fact, Get hold of the Pope, Bush, Rice, and other leaders who believe they have been wronged and I shall be happy to hear all your arguments, and shall settle your differences, or at least show you how we can live with them.\nHappy holidays.
122860
Nuclear weapons will never be used in a real war between two equally matched forces, as it hasn't even been used in various small/bush wars such as Iraq and Vietnam. I think it's a useless weapon, and a very dangerous one at that too. Imagine the power one lunatic could have if they got one. On the other hand, you couldn't use it in a real war because that would essentially guarantee your own destruction, as you could never be 100% sure you can eliminate every country's nukes. It's a scary weapon, and we haven't seen the last of it yet...