Donald Trump and a majority of South Koreans believe that South Korea should have a nuclear weapon. Are they right?
During the Cold War, nuclear deterrence failed to thwart crises, which were subsequently solved with good, old politics.
A pretext for the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in European states is to free them from the need to develop nuclear weapons.
Strange as it sounds, the decision to target weapons over cities only added to nuclear risk.
What would be the benefits to Iran of developing nuclear weapons?
Whether or not nuclear weapons are ever abolished, mankind will still know how to make them, right?
If doomed by a nuclear attack, what does it avail us to retaliate?
“Virtual deterrence” may sound like a step in the right direction to disarmament advocates, but it could actually grease the skids to nuclear war.
Nine months after stepping down as Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama conceded that he had just given “deterrence” as the factor necessitating retention of the US Marine Corps on Okinawa because he needed a pretext.
Assorted emissions and discharges from the world of nuclear weapons.
Does no nukes equal more might for the U.S.?
Nuclear weapons are a clarion call to look at the whole subject to which nuclear weapons are a sub-category — mass warfare.
Another one of globalization’s massive security loopholes.
The United States has used its nuclear weapons in many ways. Like cannibalism and slavery, however, nuclear weapons can be abolished.