Morality in owning Nukes.

Submitted by Chino (Australia), Feb 19, 2009 at 14:53

I've looked at the idea the Hiroshima and Nagasaki were used to end the war but the fact is Japan's cities had been laid waste, far worse than Germany. Japan's dwellings were mostly wooden, carpet bombing incindiaries by the far superior B-22s had leveled 80-90% of all major and regional cities in Japan. The country had no merchant fleet, navy, was under complete blockade, had millions of trapped soldiers on the mainland and no industry left to fight back with. The Russian entry into the war made it beyond hopeless. The 2 nukes on top of that I believe were more a return on the billions spent developing the weapons and a statement of US power. The US had no reason to land millions of marines on Kyushu. Strictly speaking there's no moral reason why the US can deprive Iran of nuclear weapons. However nations don't stockpile arms on principle, it's a strategic imperative to limit nuclear proliferation especially to unstable theocracies. The issue would be moral if the Iranians make good on their promised agression against the Iraeli state. We have no duty to be good to our enemies.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".