NUCLEAR PEACE

It is commons sense that weapons cause war; war is bad, so weapons are bad. Nuclear weapons, being the most destructive of weapons and capable of complete annihilation, are then obviously the worst -

- as according to the often fallacious logic of today's liberal bourgeois, thinking like all reactionaries without actually understanding the issue.

Nuclear weapon capability has in recent decades has spread faster than one could say "nuclear disarmament". In proper reactionary fashion, nations have chosen to get rid of these nuke-abilities through UN resolutions, sanctions, and helping spread anti-nuclear sentiments among the general public .

Yet, the very basic premise that nuclear weapons and world peace are mutually exclusive, is FALSE. The first nukes - dropped onto Japan - were a main contributor to the end of WWII, saving thousands of lives that would have been lost through conventional warfare. Throughout the Cold War, the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) along with both superpowers possessing nuclear capability, ensured that none of the thousands of nuclear weapons were actually used. Yes, there are more parties involved in today's nuclear arena, but the game theory is still the same. Not only would MAD prevent nukes from being used, it would prevent any conventional war - saving uncountable lives. In addition, nuclear weapons would shield smaller nations from foreign imperialistic infringements on sovereignty.

The same idea was (more eloquently) iterated in an old Newsweek cover article by Jonathan Tepperman: http://www.newsweek.com/id/214248