Nuclear weapons testing agree or disagree?

Nuclear weapons testing has released nuclear radiation into the environment. These tests have always been justified as necessary for national security. Do you agree or not? What are the risks? What are the benefits?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Around the mid 60s, we realized that nuclear testing was damaging the environment for everyone. And all the nuclear nations got together and signed a treaty that nuclear weapons would no longer be tested in the atmosphere, or in space. (Did you know the treaty also includes the moon and even other planets we might reach someday?)

    And since then, as far as we know, there haven't been any nuclear tests in the air. We have done all our (very infrequent) testing underground, where it's very safe.

    Testing is important, though. We did a test in the Pacific after the end of WWII, and the weapon we tested turned out to be about 10 times as powerful as we had expected. This was very early in the nuclear age, and someone got their calculations wrong. It's amazing nobody was killed. A Japanese fishing vessel was caught in the cloud of fallout, and the story was in the papers for days, in fact the incident led to the original Japanese Godzilla film, about a lizard 'mutated' by radiation into a monster.

    In the 50s and 60s, testing was really to warn other countries. China really scared everyone when they tested a 50 megaton bomb in 1961 (I think it was). I was in school then and I remember reading about it. A 50 megaton bomb could wipe out half a state--like NYC, most of Long Island, half of New Jersey, etc. In fact, it would be almost impossible to use a weapon like that in an actual war, except as a 'doomsday' weapon, an act of incredible desperation. We all realized that shortly thereafter, and the nuclear weapons in our arsenal, and the USSR's, and China's, all got much smaller.

    Also, consider that every nuclear nation realizes that whoever uses nukes first loses. No leader of a nuclear nation can imagine a scenario by which he has anything to gain by first use of nukes. Nations want them as a deterrent. For instance, 90% or more of the people of North Korea live in a single city, which could be totally wiped out by a relatively small Hiroshima-sized bomb. Against which they have no defense. Do you think this is how Kim wants to be remembered? 8^P

    Consequently every nuclear nation has signed a No First Use treaty. Except, of course, the US.

  • 1 decade ago

    Build reasons for others to fear F#cking with us....and the risks are the world is full of bad people. Being ready for the bad is better than blindly waiting for it..

    Funny Iran isn't at the talks...I wonder why?

    North Korea isn't there...They know our President is a weak,inexperienced arrogant Marxist.

  • 1 decade ago

    Our last nuclear test was 23 September 1992. It is not even an issue.

  • 1 decade ago

    We need to test 2 more

    1. center of Iran

    2. Center of N. Korea

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    That explains the low IQ of the liberals.

  • 1 decade ago

    i disagree with nuclear weapons.mankind has done nothing but destroy the earth. we claim to be so great with new technological advancements but in reality we are slowly destroying ourselves

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    agree

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    we don't need to test 'em. we have already perfected them.

  • 1 decade ago

    seems fine to me

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.