Notices

View Poll Results: What Should Be Done With Nuclear Weapons?

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • No Change; Can Develop More

    0 0%
  • No Change, But No More Development

    0 0%
  • Reduce the Amount

    5 83.33%
  • Develop Mini-Nukes

    0 0%
  • Create the Nuclear Weapon Free Zone

    0 0%
  • Negotiate Treaties To Put This Issue Aside For A Moment

    1 16.67%
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Unremovable Waste

  1. #1 Unremovable Waste 
    Forum Freshman BitterSweet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Washington, USA
    Posts
    30
    This has been a problem for decades. Nowadays we hear about swine flu, murders, terrorism, but we rarely hear of nuclear weapons being an issue now.
    Radioactive materials are very hard to remove. For there are many accidents involving nuclear and there have been many nuclear testings, there are tremendous amount of radioactivity in the world, in soil, in ocean, in air.

    What should be done with our 30,000 nuclear weapons in the world?
    With 30% possessed by U.S. shouldn't we be the one to take an action?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor marcusclayman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,702
    It's a tough call. Strategically we can't just get rid of them because then it will just be a matter of whoever hides the most now has the power.

    I still vote for getting rid of them. I'd rather be that naive country that get's enslaved than that Nazi country that does the enslaving. Never-mind being responsible for destroying the world.


    Dick, be Frank.

    Ambiguity Kills.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Unremovable Waste 
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by BitterSweet
    but we rarely hear of nuclear weapons being an issue now.
    Hardly a day goes by where this isn't in the news....either about Iran's development or, more recently, control of them in Pakistan.

    We probably need to reduce them and provide options to 3rd world nations to develop nuke power with technology and safeguards so they don't develop more weapons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Realistically, and for the foreseeable future, nuclear weapons are here to stay. However, having large stockpiles of them is just ludicrous. I am glad to see that Obama recognises this and is beginning moves towards a reduction.

    At one stage, during the height of the Cold War, the USA had 30,000 nuclear warheads, and the USSR had 20,000. How crazy is that! They were supposed to be required as a 'deterrent'. Yet, if you were the Premier of the USSR, would you be deterred by 30,000 warheads pointed at you, but not deterred by 1000? Or even 100? or 20?

    While we aint gonna be free of this curse any time soon, I do not see any need for more than a very small number of nuclear weapons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Unremovable Waste 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by BitterSweet
    For there are many accidents involving nuclear
    Which accidents are you referring to?
    there are tremendous amount of radioactivity in the world, in soil, in ocean, in air.
    True, but what does that have to do with nuclear weapons?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74
    He probably means Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Windscale, Several nuclear submarines (US and USSR) , 3 dumped Nukes off the coast of Spain (refuelling accident), A lost Nuke off the coast of US (dumped after a mid-air collision, Those are just the ones off the top of my head....


    Addition:-

    Google nuclear accidents yields many lists, eg

    http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/...nob/rep02.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,079
    We can reduce the number of nuclear weapons or we can reduce the amount of nuclear material but we cannot reduce the amount of nuclear weapons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •