Let's disarm our nukes and see what happens.

I propose the US disarm it’s nukes, and let’s see what happens. It’s not like russia or North korea is going to start throwing nukes at us. I think the only real problem that could occur is when say Russia meddles with a country we say hey stop it, then they tell us to go fuck ourselves but that happens regardless of whether we got nukes or not because we both know neither of us has the balls to fire them.

So, if we disarm our nukes, and we create a treaty to disarm and never create nuclear bombs (unless Elon wants to nuke mars), wont other countries follow our lead since realistically if they did shoot off a nuke at us or an ally, they’d get obliterated even without us using nukes. We can regulate the resources and information people need to create nuclear bombs well enough, and if we had Russia side with us on this we could crack down on North Korea.

I think we as a whole are just afraid to take the first step towards disarmament, I’m sure there will be many people responding to this with immediate rejections citing different reasons why they believe disarming our nukes would be problematic. But none of that really matters since it happens anyways, whether we have nukes or not.

Edit: I think we could frame it this way, having nukes is more dangerous than not having nukes. Whatever problems could occur or be blamed on disarmament, would not outweigh the dangers having active nukes pose.

Not having nukes when other countries do have nukes is more dangerous than having nukes. So we can’t frame it that way.

I propose we dismantle the fire department, and see if any more fires happen…

We won’t have any more environmental issues if we just get rid of the environment.

Multilateral arms-reduction treaties are not necessarily a bad idea; it’s not like it must be a unilateral or all-or-nothing decision.

I disagree, them having nukes and us not having nukes is no more dangerous than us having nukes, in fact it’s less dangerous.

Why in the heck do you think a country would get “obliterated” if they nuked us after we’ve removed our own nuclear deterrent? Who, in this scenario, do you imagine would be doing the obliterating?

That applies to nuclear powers that are stable, rational countries. That can not be said about the USA at this time. Hopefully the USA will stabilize before an irrecoverable act is made.

I guess in this fantasy…the UK and France retaliate??? Not likely. Russia has nukes for them too.

Exactly. Here’s a hypothetical scenario:

President Kamala decommissions all our nukes in early 2029. Shortly afterwards, Putin nukes our 100 largest cities and our 100 most important military bases. They broadcast a radio transmission to the smoldering ruins of America, and to France and the UK (now just England and Wales) and says, “if you lay a finger on us in retaliation, we’ll nuke cities #101-200, as well as London and Paris and the next 10 largest cities in England and France”. You think anyone’s going to do anything to Russia at that point? I don’t.

Maybe China thinks they can surprise them? That all i got.

Here’s the sort of thing that I’m getting at about the lack of stability.

I assume that the USA troop withdrawal from Turkey did not include withdrawing the USA nuke protection troops, but I have not come across anything definitive.

We withdrew from northern Syria. AFAIK, we’ve still got several thousand people stationed at Incirlik.


What do you mean your nukes? they also protect NATO,Taiwan,Sth Korea,Australia and the Saudi etc etc who start building their own the day after the USA decommissions their own weapons. What could possibly go wrong.

No, we, as a whole live in the real world…a world inhabited by humans. Even WITH the current situation, countries push at the status quo and push at the US and our allies. How, after disarming ourselves and leaving ourselves and our allies totally at the mercy of folks like Putin and Xi (and the CCP for gods sake :eek:) would help is, well, a mystery. It’s a crazy idea. Hell, if I were either of them I wouldn’t disarm either.

No, either everyone disarms together, which, frankly, is never going to happen, or no one does. Which is more likely. We haven’t even been successful in stopping other nations from getting the evil things, even nations who should never, ever have them.

As to your thinking that having nukes (that is, us having them) is more dangerous than not, well…that’s true, if we were some small nation who didn’t care about what goes on outside our borders and has zero influence or need for outside connections. Sadly, the US ain’t that nation. Even without nukes, the US would be a target…in fact, without them, we’d be more of a target, unless we decided that we would go total isolationist, feudal Japan levels, and didn’t want any trade or any input into how the world operates. Assuming we don’t go that route, then not having nukes just means we are open to that much more external extortion by countries that do…and pretty much renders our conventional military useless, or so degraded at to be so. We move a carrier, and North Korea threatens a nuclear strike. What do we do then? Hope they are bluffing? And if they aren’t? I guess just take the hit. China decides that it doesn’t want these silly freedom of navigation runs the US is doing in ‘their’ territory (since ancient times, dontchaknow??) and threatens a nuke strike. What do we do? Russia decides it REALLY doesn’t like all these former client slave states…sorry, partner countries…to have left them and joined NATO…and decides that isn’t acceptable. And threatens to use it’s far superior nuclear capabilities unless NATO tosses them out for the Soviets…er, sorry, the Russian Federation…to snatch them back up. What do you suppose NATO does with a toothless US? Sure, they have some nukes…think the Europeans would risk a confrontation with a nuclear superior Russia and no US to back them up? :dubious:

Absolutely not. The moment the USA goes nuke-free, you’ll see ally nations like Poland, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, etc. - maybe even Vietnam and Ukraine - going nuclear. Bear in mind that Taiwan, for instance, had a nuclear-weapons program in the 1980s and didn’t stop it until the US applied strong pressure on it to stop.
America going nuke-free would ***cause ***more nuclear proliferation, not less.

You both are absolutely correct.

Absolutely. They would have too. And they would be behind the curve instantly, and trying to catch up. And extremely anxious about the situation. It’s similar to what would happen if the US suddenly decided, fuck it, we don’t need no stinkin’ military anymore, everyone fend for themselves. There would be a panic, and an instant arms race and build up on all sides. The world would be completely destabilized.

Ironically, China itself would frantically be building nukes. Their own current (modest) nuclear posture is predicated on the US, our own nuclear levels and policies, and the balance between the US and Russia wrt nukes. They figured, we don’t need as many, just enough for a credible deterrence. But that calculation would instantly change if the US did this silly idea of the OPs.

I’m a “no nukes “ kind of guy and a risk taker at heart. Even so, “See what happens” is not a policy I could endorse.