Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What are some humanitarian benefits of nuclear weapons?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:08 PM
Original message
What are some humanitarian benefits of nuclear weapons?
Nuclear weapons technology already exists and is not likely to be forgotten any time soon. So you could argue that it doesn't matter whether or not there are any benefits. Even if there are no humanitarian benefits for people in general, the technology is here to stay.

However, what if tax dollars in various countries support research towards the creation of weapons even more destructive than existing nuclear weapons? Is there such distrust among nations that competitive pressures force them to continue to develop more destructive weapons that everybody would prefer to never use?

The title question is not intended to be a rhetorical question. I have one answer. It seems that, at least when nuclear weapons were first introduced, those at the highest levels in political and military hierarchies were as vulnerable as ordinary soldiers and civilians when it comes to nuclear weapons. Leaders might be less likely to launch aggressive wars to become "conquering heroes" if they are no safer than the cannon fodder that they send out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
genie_weenie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Space Travel
Massive Earth Demolition projects, Astronomical usages (moon mining, astreiod realignment)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
don954 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. well.. if you need to excavate a big area really fast...
it was one of the ideas from project plowshare.

They also give the ultimate protection, no one invades a nuke armed nation. Also, the leaders of most nuke armed nations act more carefully, worried they will start WWIII... An armed society is a polite society..

China broke the cycle, they realized that it was only required to obtain a quantity of nukes to act as a deterrence, and a huge stockpile wasn't necessary. After all, how many times CAN one blow up the planet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. That the USA and USSR never came to blows directly
That would have been fucking heinous
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enigma000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
4. The humanitarian benefit is no lunatic is going to nuke you
because of the inevitable and unprecedented counter-attack. The US nuclear shield extends over Europe and parts of the Pacific rim. Latin America too, I guess........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. Quick and easy answer to overpopulation and global warming (nuke winter)
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. We will develop more heinous weapons technology, I'm sure
The higher-ups in government fancy the idea of building orbiting weapons platforms that can rain bombs down on targets at hypersonic speed. If we ever colonized space, we would simply end up building warships in space to defend colonial possessions against other nations wanting a piece of real estate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brokensymmetry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. Cures the heartbreak of psoriasis? n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think your answer is incorrect
You wrote,
The title question is not intended to be a rhetorical question. I have one answer. It seems that, at least when nuclear weapons were first introduced, those at the highest levels in political and military hierarchies were as vulnerable as ordinary soldiers and civilians when it comes to nuclear weapons. Leaders might be less likely to launch aggressive wars to become "conquering heroes" if they are no safer than the cannon fodder that they send out.

When nuclear weapons were created, plans were made for the political and military hierarchies to survive attack. Leaders have always been vulnerable to assassination: JFK, "Murder Inc.", Indira Ghandi, Hitler, many attempts on Saddam Hussein, Kaddafi, Castro. On 911, Rice and Cheney went into nuclear-hardened bunkers, the Pentagon was hit directly, and then came the anthrax attacks.

A few years ago, India and Pakistan escalated near nuclear war; India pointed out that it could easily absorb whatever Pakistan threw at it, but Pakistan would be wiped out. So just having nukes isn't necessarily an effective deterrent.

If you read PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses", even the neocons don't want bigger weapons, they want smaller weapons, small tactical nukes, bunker busters, bioweapons that target specific groups, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 22nd 2014, 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC