Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If we are to Disarm our nuclear weapons. It must be bilateral Watch

    • Thread Starter

    Hello folks.

    Either first time or one of my first few threads so forgive me if anything is amiss and feel free to let me know.

    I would like to talk about Nuclear Disarmament.

    Now for a long time i've been a supporter in keeping our nuclear weapons, and even to this day i believe in their function and ultimately their use should the need arise.

    However with the increase in support for disarmament i wanted to discuss the idea of a bilateral, instead of unilateral disarmament if it is going to take place.

    Here's why: A bilateral disarmament would represent a physical as well as a deeply symbolic change in the attitude of the UK and other countries towards their nuclear stockpiles.

    Now our stockpiles are comparatively small compared to other nations:

    You have the US and Russia in joint first place with over 5000 nuclear warheads each.

    Then there are the other countries:
    France: 300
    Israel: 60-400 Supposedly
    UK: 215
    China: 260
    Pakistan: 120
    And finally good ole' North Korea with about ten.

    So as you can see the UK's stockpile is small, but what if another nuclear disarmament treaty worked based on proportions of stockpiles instead of basic numbers?

    This could mean that a 5% disarmament in the UK would equate to about 11 warheads. Whilst in the US and Russia that would equate to 250 warheads each.

    We would be fools to believe that anywhere near our lifetime we're going to see outright nuclear disarmament, as unfortunately other countries, especially China and Russia are working on more-powerful delivery systems. However i feel that we do have a chance to reduce the worldwide nuclear stockpile overall.

    I would like to know what YOU folks think on this, is it feasible? Do you agree with it? Should trident stay or should it go as soon as possible?

    Best regards

    Agreed. As much as I'd like to get rid of nuclear weapons, I'm totally against unilateral disarmament (unless we create a foolproof way to stop a nuclear strike which unfortunately would be far harder & more expensive).
    Therefore I believe Trident should be replaced when the time comes. Although it'd be cheaper to have land based ICBMs, the risk is too great. Submarine based weapon systems are therefore still logical.

    Our creators wants us to use nuclear weapons in the next major conflict
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.