India and Pakistan

[memphis mike]

Has the fact that both countries have nuclear weapons deterred a conventional war? If so, will these weapons continue to 'keep the peace'? What happens between these two countries if one falls into the hands of radical extremists? All countries seem to have a finite form of government or leadership. Debbie has made us aware that India could eventually fall to Hindu extremists...I am sure Pakistan could fall to extremists within their country also?

Would either of these events cause the dual annihilation?

Or, regardless, will nuclear weapons insure future annihilation in any event?

[memphis mike]

No one interested? I thought the topic of nuclear weapons would be a hot issue...Steve H, where are you?

[NRKofOver]

For me, I think the idea of deterrence because of close proximity makes little sense. I would guess that the only reason to have nukes is so you can actually retaliate assuming someone actually pushed the button. But oddly, individual and especially developing nations don't need nukes for any reason. If a neighbor has one, they can't use it on anyone, regardless of their neighbor's retaliatory weapons. If Crazy Man Kim nukes Japan he's a suicidal nut (which is possible), but Japan doesn't need nukes because if N. Korea takes such an approach, even China would be fighting to eliminate and remove Kim.



Ultimately, nukes are a pointless endeavor and a waste of massive resources for no reason. I really wish that the nations with significant arsenals (the US, Russia and satellites, and a few European nations) would set the example of moving towards complete nuclear disarmament. Then telling people like India and Pakistan and even Iraq that they cannot develop nuclear weapons would make much more sense. In the meantime, everyone is trying to 'keep up with the Joneses'.



I could be wrong, but I really doubt anyone will ever use a nuke without being pushed into a corner.

Read all about ME!