If the US has nuclear weapons, why shouldn't every nation?

Answer 1

So the US can rule over them and get oil very cheap and sell it to the public at an outstanding profit......It's the United States of Exxon...

Answer 2

I don't disagree with your logic, but I do believe it is over simplified. The United States has checks and balances on power and it's application, this includes nuclear weapons. The United States has a stable long standing government The same cannot be said for many nations around the world. There are great dangers to the world as a whole in allowing rogue or unstable states to develop and deploy nuclear weapons. This is based on the higher probability of use by these states against their enemies. The use of such weapons are of interest to the world as a whole as any nuclear exchange in this day and age will effect the world as a whole on many different levels. I do not believe the United States alone should be allowed to determine who can develop what weapons, but in our current debates on nuclear weapons this is not the case anyway. The United Nations are against both Korea and Iran having these weapons.

Answer 3

US pretends that it has some moral high ground to judge other nations. Very ironic coming from the only nation to actually use nuclear weapons on another country. The US pretends nukes are a bad thing but keeps thousands of them stockpiled costing a lot of money. The US is interested in using nuclear weapons they are trying to research low yield nukes to minimize the politics of using a nuclear weapon. The US will use nuclear weapons in a second if they start losing.

Answer 4

The Scientist who made the atomic bomb hoped that its powerful destructive force would be a deterrent to war. Einstein and Szilard who were key in building the bomb asked pres. Truman to not use the bomb against the Japanese. Unfortunately the attack on the main Islands of Japan would have cost such a tremendous amount of American soldiers lives that the gov. decided the A-bomb would be a better Idea.

The rest of the world should not have atomic bombs because political rivalries, terrorism, ethnic rivalries, national rivalries are all to common reasons to start wars. If all the atomic weapons exploded at one time all life on the world would end within a year. The Atomic Bomb is far to dangerous in Antibody's hands not just the US.

The only reason the rest of the world has a-boms is because they were made from secrets stolen from Los Alamos (the Manhattan project) (ex: USSR, China) or they were given to the countries by us (ex: Brittan, France)

This is by no means the full answer to you question but this will help you if you want to learn more. Books, Dissertations and websites have all been devoted to this topic, good luck!

Answer 5

You see how much conflict and killing there is in the world right now? Now imagine that EVERY conflict, just or not, has the potential to be a NUCLEAR conflict. This crap in Somalia? Nuclear. Turkey and the Kurds? Nuclear. Sri Lenka and the Tamil Tigers? Nuclear. Think of every conflict that happens not only on a yearly, or monthly basis but DAILY becoming a stand off between nuclear armed rivals. Eventually someone WILL slip and a whole region will go up in a mushroom cloud with global consequences.

But, you know since the U.S. and a handful of other countries have them then who cares, huh? Lets gamble with the fate of humanity for the sake of fairness. We can leave a message on a giant tomb stone monument to whatever civilization comes after: At least we were fair...

Answer 6

Because the nations without nukes signed a treaty where they agreed not to pursue such weapons and technology. They may use nuclear power but under the strict watch of the UN. Some nations didn't sign this treaty like Israel,Pakistan and India thus they can make such weapons as they please.

Answer 7

I think that owning nuclear weapons involves a necessary political stability...something that several nations doesn't have.

It also need a "logical" government...when I hear Iranian leader telling Israel must be erased from the map...I don't want them to have nuclear weapons.

Answer 8

When we dropped A-Bombs on Japan, we had no idea the repercussions of our actions or the long lasting effects of a nuclear blast. We now know that it is best to not use them, hence, the "cold war" was just a standoffish "I'm better than you" sort of thing. We are mature enough to know that although we have the power to use them, the real power is having the restraint to not use them. That is why we and a few other countries have them, and others (less trusted and stable governments) do not and are not allowed to.

Answer 9

This question has been asked before. It is true that the Unites States does not want other countries to have nuclear weapons. You logic goes out the window when you give it to countries that would use them. The united States has them for defense. There are too many kook leaders out there that have other motives on nuclear weapons.

Answer 10

I agree with your logic but I would rather NO nation have nuclear weapons. It would be much better to use nuclear power as a energy source instead of a means to destroy.

Answer 11

Because you have some nations, such as Iran and North Korea that are itching launch these nuclear weapons against actual and perceived enemies with the intent of starting wars. Now, I ask you, with intercontinental missiles having the range they do, would you want Iran having some pointed in our direction?