That's what the nuclear hawks would like us to believe. We often believe
what we want to believe. Me too.
Yet, without nuclear weapons we've had no full-scale Indo-Pak wars since
1971. Even pre-nuke South Asia border skirmishes and conflicts did not
escalate into wars.
So what is the co-relation between nuclear weapons and the absence of
wars? We just don't know.
All that I know is that the campaigners against nuclear weapons/energy
in India have undertaken impressive analysis of how this sector's tall
claims are not met by reality, and probably is source for a good deal of
large-scale corruption (being shrouded by secrecy).
As for the 'positive benefits' of nuclear weapons, we all know of places
called Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Of course, the spin doctors then told us
that the dropping of the bombs ended WWII speedily. In hindsight, it was
perhaps meant more to overawe the US's European still-colonial allies
into accepting the reality that the post-WWII reality would be US, and
not European, dominated.
My wider point is that we need not worry too much about the personal
beliefs of anyone, provided it doesn't affect the public order or
threaten other citizens. I fail to see how cow's urine could do any of
this. It's specially easy to laugh at the beliefs of others which seem
odd to us. But, I guess, our beliefs seem equally ludicrous to others. FN
Bosco D'Mello wrote:
From: FN]
As a counter question: do scientific tests support the possibility
That smoking and alcohol are good for health? Or that nuclear weapons
benefit humankind?
RESPONSE: If India and Pakistan did not posses nuclear weapons, we would be at war,
with major consequences, at least twice in the past decade, if nuclear weapons was
not part of the equation. That is a benefit!!
