Anti-nuclear proliferation activists argue nuclear weapons are too dangerous for countries altogether. The immense destructive force held within a single nuclear bomb is already too much. An entire arsenal has the potential the destroy all of humanity. That's not a power anyone should have.
A single nuclear weapon can destroy a city and kill most of its people, making it impossible to provide meaningful aid to the survivors. A nuclear war could kill many more people in an hour than were killed during the entire second world war.Nuclear detonations in cities would ignite massive fires with extreme and long-lasting environmental consequences, disrupting the Earth’s climate and agricultural productivity. Less than 1% of the nuclear weapons in the world today could cause a nuclear famine with the potential to put two billion people at risk of starvation.
Supporters of nuclear proliferation argue peace can only achieved by strength. Nukes are the ultimate weapon for peace when other countries know the devastating consequences for their actions.
To be credible, nuclear weapons must be a key component underpinning relevant U.S. foreign policy. It erodes morale and encourages perpetually low funding when the Nuclear Posture Review adds “as long as nuclear weapons exist” to the phrase “safe, secure and effective,” as if it is a foregone conclusion that these weapons will be eliminated. Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, France, Britain and North Korea all treat nuclear weapons as a key component in their nation’s strategy, and they are modernizing weapons and/or delivery systems.