Nuclear Weapons.

[Land Of Upright Men]

In the cold war, we saw two superpowers try to outstock each other with weapons beyond terrible.

My question is, after a revolution in one country, if it was already a nuclear power, would you keep the Nukes, or disarm them?

Even if America was about to fire on us, i would not nuke them back, as i fight for all the workers, the ones in my country, in America, and the global proletariat as a whole.

The only reason i could imagine some of you having them, is to bluff the USA out of destroying the revolution, but i still would not use nukes to defend socialism, only the people who furiously masturbate over che and his wish for Nuclear warfare would most likely agree with having nukes, but i would like to see.

Cheers

[piet11111]

Definitely keep them as a deterrence to an enemy's first strike and as an alternative to having a large standing army.
You know the whole idea of M.A.D would make any attack on us a suicide mission.

That in and of itself is enough reason for us to keep or create nuclear weapons.

I do not see how anybody can honestly say that without nuclear weapons on both sides the cold war would have stayed a cold one.

[Peace on Earth]

Until all people realize that the use of nuclear weapons would be detrimental to all people, themselves included, it's probably best to have them as a deterent to a capitalist counter-revolution or invasion.

[Rusty Shackleford]

a strong military deterrence is required until socialist states or what have you are calling the shots globally.

the soviets would probably had been invaded within a decade of WWII had they not developed nuclear weapons.

only after revolution is spread all across the world will states begin to whither away(so long as society is capable of it) and armies will begin to disband for lack of need.

[BuddhaInBabylon]

god i hope you're right Vacant.

[Autumn Red]

Keep them for deterrence, if nothing else they'll keep the capitalist countries with stronger militaries from attacking.

[Rusty Shackleford]

god i hope you're right Vacant.
things are constantly changing. it is ridicuolous to believe that a socialist state would be there forever after it is built. even if the whole world was socialist.

there may be a revolution after that to smash the state if it hangs around too long. thats also the time when the conditions are probably right for the state to fade away anyways.

the socialist state exists to defend revolution and to help strengthen class consciousness and prepare all of society for communism. basically perfecting a centralized economy and working to then strengthen workplace democracy even more.

since the working class is the most revolutionary class, when it deems it in its interest, it will do away with the state.

this is the same reason why a socialist state has the right to develop a defense. history has shown that anywhere socialism is successful, it comes under immediate attack.

i dont like nuclear weapons, but they are a very strong deterrent. their time will pass, like almost all things.


EDIT: btw buddha i wasnt calling you ridiculous lol.