Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.

Look at Post to See Question!

Yes
0
No votes
Yes, but only if I had no allies who could reliably defend me with their nuclear arsenal
1
17%
No
5
83%
 
Total votes: 6

Cirion Spellbinder
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:28 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Presumably somewhere

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by Cirion Spellbinder »

garrethdsouza wrote:Apart from America, pretty much every country has done exactly that after getting nuclear weapons. Apart from tests,nothing to anyone else. It's more for deterrence of invasions etc imo.
I concur. What do you think of anti-missile technology research as an alternative?
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10332
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Cirion Spellbinder wrote:Would being allies with a nation with a nuclear arsenal be superior to having them yourself?
It's a free lunch.
Cirion Spellbinder
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:28 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Presumably somewhere

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by Cirion Spellbinder »

brimstoneSalad wrote:
Cirion Spellbinder wrote:Would being allies with a nation with a nuclear arsenal be superior to having them yourself?
It's a free lunch.
I don't think I understand what you mean by this? I apologize, but could you elaborate?
User avatar
Kyron
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:27 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by Kyron »

Cirion Spellbinder wrote: I don't think I understand what you mean by this? I apologize, but could you elaborate?
I think he means yes. It's like having a lunch (nuclear weapons) that you don't have to pay for.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10332
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Kyron wrote:
Cirion Spellbinder wrote: I don't think I understand what you mean by this? I apologize, but could you elaborate?
I think he means yes. It's like having a lunch (nuclear weapons) that you don't have to pay for.
If true, yes. But also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_ain ... free_lunch
Cirion Spellbinder
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:28 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Presumably somewhere

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by Cirion Spellbinder »

So as of now I'd say that my nation would not own nuclear weapons if I had notable allies with nuclear weapons. Otherwise, I still am having trouble seeing why having an arsenal of expensive and destructive weapons to prevent logical (of varying degrees) nations from exploiting or attacking me.
Cirion Spellbinder
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:28 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Presumably somewhere

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by Cirion Spellbinder »

A third option has been added. Please revisit the question to consider it.
If you have any other suggestions for options, I'd be happy to add them.
User avatar
miniboes
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1578
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:52 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Netherlands

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by miniboes »

I think I would personally put myself in the situation of trying to make the other nations get rid of their nuclear weapons. Not owning nuclear weapons would therefore be logical, as hypocrisy is never a good thing when trying to persuade people (just look at the climate change discussion between China and the US).
"I advocate infinite effort on behalf of very finite goals, for example correcting this guy's grammar."
- David Frum
User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: Nuclear Arms and Weapons in General

Post by NonZeroSum »

-

I think tin-pot dictators owning a few nukes like North Korea is a good defence against invasion if you can build it faster than any country can amass the public will to invade and so forces other countries to only deal with you through diplomacy.

I don't think anyone else should own nukes today, because as soon as someone actually uses a nuke they would simply be invaded by many countries to create a change of government or they would be ousted very soon after for committing such an evil act.

In the past when the world was divided into such big blocks and you couldn't be assured of your government being ousted if you used nukes to destroy the enemy, maybe in that case it was good for preventing open war with soviet and american troops.

-
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movement media.
PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Ishkah YouTube: https://youtube.com/Ishkah
Post Reply