Nuclear Disarmament, Possible?

[Scribbles]

Sorry for the obvious bias in the article, I’ll try dig around for a more balanced view once I have a bit more time…

Link to Article!

I’m not going to write too much on this, I’m more interested to hear what everyone else thinks, especially those from nuclear-capable countries...

I can say without a doubt that I’m firmly in the disarmament camp and yet I can’t help but balk at the timing. Why choose now, the possible age of polarization, to FINALLY hit the world with this proposal? This line of thought for me is amplified when you consider that the UN is facing up to some of its biggest contributors through this demand. I know it might appear unlikely that this will cause any of said nations to leave but, when it comes to judging unlikely events, I’ve been wrong so often it’s started to give me pause. After all, it looks as if the world has been rushing to draw lines in the sand over the past few years, so I’m at the point where I feel anything could happen…

Politics aside, it seems almost naïve to consider the idea of all nations complying with such a treaty. How do you enforce something like this? I can’t imagine many countries, especially the heavies, saying, “Of course you can inspect all our top military facilities for nuclear weapons!” There’s hardly been compliance on far easier to follow international obligations and guidelines…

Simply put, I suppose that I’m still for disarmament but I’m wondering if we should put such talks on hold until the world is at a more stable place. Then again, from a grimmer perspective, maybe now is the best time for a treaty like this?

[Nachtmahr]

I like to dream of a day where no single country holds the power to effectively wipe out most life on earth at the press of a button, but if all nuclear nations refuse to cooperate, I don't know that there's much we can really do?

It's kind of like a class where all the students, except the bullies, are petitioning for the bullies to stop bullying them. I don't see how we would ever effectively enforce something like this, as military intervention is obviously not an option, and any meaningful sanctions are equally unlikely.

In other words, I like the idea of it, but I don't see how it would ever work.

[Scribbles]

You pretty much echoed my thoughts...

I find it strange but anti-nuclear power protests seem to get more coverage than anti-nuclear weapon protests... >_>

[Nachtmahr]

You pretty much echoed my thoughts...

I find it strange but anti-nuclear power protests seem to get more coverage than anti-nuclear weapon protests... >_>

Well, to be honest, I think it's just because of the context. An anti-nuclear power protest could potentially have an effect on the outcome, or at least spark and important debate about nuclear power.

An anti-nuclear weapons protest is inherently futile because of how they are heard, but not recognized, by nuclear nations. You're not going to change anything. At best, you might force the government to issue a statement. At worst, literally nothing comes of it. :/ It's one of those classic examples of broken democracy. Of governments telling their citizens that "We know better!" and so on.