with or against nuclear weapons?

[duk]

hey guys... i think nuc weapons is like an assurance 2 every country against an american attack!! i think if iraqis had really nuc weapons , usa would never attack them... why doesnt usa attack N.korea?? i think because they have already some nuc weapons! and usa wants 2 attack iran before its to late , i mean before iran will have nuc weapons!

[DRS]

USA would of attacked Iraq if they have "WOMD" or not, they just wanted their oil and would of sacrificed everyone to get that oil and make more money.

i personally am against Nuclear weapons, wars should be kept between the soldiers who signed up, nuclear weapons, well the big ones, usualy end up killing many inocent civilans.

Just look at the situation when America dropped the Atomic Bomb on japan, killing millions of inocent adults and children, its disgusting

[seen_che]

AGAINST

If a person has a fly on him ...you just kill the fly, you dont smash the person!!!

[Purple]

against.. it cant really be justified enough.. hell with weapons, alltogether..

[The idealist]

Blank

Nuklear weapons are designed to dissuade and prevent war. The whole POINT of nuklear weapons is that you skillfully use their political pressure rather than blowing up the planet.
Frankly seeing G W Bush (a man I wouldn't trust to find his arse with an atlas) in possesion of them really worries me.

[Dio]

Weapons of Mass Destruction are used for deterance mostly. As exemplified by the U.S. and U.S.S.R. arms race during the cold war, both countries built up a surplus of chemical/biological/nuclear weapons to deter one another. If there was credible evidance that Saddam had WMD's then probably an invasion wouldn't happen.

Another thing is Bush and his administration would never even try to use WMD's since, in doing so might create embargos from other nations.

[RJRevolution]

I am highly against nuclear weapons. They are used for only one purpose, to kill innocent people during a war. A war is fought between countries and their MILITARIES, not civilians. When the US dropped A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was used for intimidation and for a civilian death toll. There was no military installations in the two cities. It is the same if a Terrorist uses a dirty bomb on civilians. Either way it is wrong.

[Free Spirit]

"Anti nuclear", very much against it...its horrifies to even know that it exists and what it can do and what it has done... It's not just what it does during the explosion, it's also what people breath in, what also happens after...it's like digging into the earths flesh and blood until nothing green will be left and no life. And the autumn will come in spring time, so bad that there is nothing left to fall... :unsure: