BBC News Updated every minute of every day

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:45 GMT 12:45 UK

Yes, we still have more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet several times over. Additionally tin pot third world countries like the UK should refuse to pay the Americans for their weapons that we rent off them. Spend the dividend on my pension and health service or expect to get voted out of power. This country has been irrelevant to global politics since Suez and its time we stopped wasting money.

jeremy slawson, plymouth, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:41 GMT 12:41 UK

What exactly does 'the spread of atomic weapons' actually mean? Who has them who is 'not allowed' to have them? There is no proof of terrorist organizations having them, and no law against sovereign nations having them, so what's the debate? Where exacty have they spread to?

Andy Walker, Mainz, Germany

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:38 GMT 12:38 UK

britain should not dis arm their nuclear arsnal because they will probabily need it in future

jordan byron, manchester

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:38 GMT 12:38 UK

How can we possibly disarm when countries such as Iran, North Korea and Pakistan, all of whom are clear in their hatred of the west, are stepping up their arms programmes? I hate nuclear weapons, but right now we need to protect ourselves and our allies, so needs must.

Craig Ruff, Manchester, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:29 GMT 12:29 UK

Nuclear weapons strike me as being the most pointless weapons in the world, for the simple fact that they can't be used. Ever. I'm sure everyone who currently has them fully realises the consequences of using them are simply far too dire to risk it.

I do find it rather terrifying that some nations that probably -don't- understand those consequences may shortly have nukes.

Allan, Paisley

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:09 GMT 12:09 UK

British intelligence services rated the UK as 'Non-Nuclear' in 1947.
This meant we didn't need it because nobody with nuclear weapons could safely attack us.
The Russians would have got 90% of the fallout on their industrial heartland.
So, why did the Labour Party at that time decide we needed it?
We've never used it, it has never stopped even the smallest nations from attacking us or our allies, so it isn't a deterrent.
Let us dump it, now!

Brian John Nicholson, Manchester, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:05 GMT 12:05 UK

Once mankind discovered how to make nuclear weapons we must forever live under their shadow, since we cannot unlearn the technology. Disarmament makes the world a little safer by ensuring the button isn't pushed in haste and allows time for diplomatic resolution of disputes.

Johnny, Herne Bay

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 11:01 GMT 12:01 UK

Does no one recognise the gross hypocrisy of the 5 major countries condemning others for developing nuclear weapons whilst keeping them themselves?

[chiptheduck], England, a suburb of Brussels

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:59 GMT 11:59 UK

If only a few of those five or six nuclear power of the world stop bullying around the world on their own accord without the consent of the International Communities, non-proliferation work is impossible to proceed towards achieving positive result as per desire.

A R Shams, Pakistan

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:56 GMT 11:56 UK

I think it is interesting that we still fear nukes so much when you can do so much more damage with a simple virus. You can even tune them to only affect people of a certain ethnicity. I think we should be watching the scientific output of rogue states as closely as their nuclear capabilities before someone breaks out the smallpox.

Alice W, Bristol, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:40 GMT 11:40 UK

What if an international organisation held all nuclear weapons and individual countries were banned from making or owning them?

SACS

A good idea but unfortunately you would be unable to ensure that the international organisation holding them would not ultimately be run by religious fundamentalists.
It would be wonderful if all countries could be trusted to have them but personally I don't want anybody who glories death over life to have their finger on the button.

[devilzadvacate]

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:25 GMT 11:25 UK

The ideal position would be one where about twenty major nations each have a very small nuclear arsenal. These nations would have a variety of different political, cultural and religious foundations.

By having such diversity, it would create a balance where no nation, or group of nations, would be able to create enough threat against the others to either dominate the world or threaten its destruction.

This is the model the United Nations should be working towards.

David Penn, Watford, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:21 GMT 11:21 UK

The UK decision to renew Trident is not a contradiction, its a fact. It would be nice not to, but any fool can see that unfortunately, it is a necessary evil. There will be those, in the near future, who, foolishly, think that we can survive without it and that the money is "Better spent" elsewhere.

Giving up our nuclear deterrent would be an act of folly that would actually encourage nuclear proliferation elsewhere, in countries where, unaware of its horrors, they would USE it.

danny streather, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:19 GMT 11:19 UK

The western world has no grounds to preach on this subject whilst they allow Israel to have nuclear weapons knowingly. To be able to make a change we need to demonstrate an unbiased, equal and fair policy to all. I think if we can start by disarming Israel then yes we can, maybe save the world from a nuclear holocaust. Allow them to keep WMD's and we are all doomed.

Gary Head, Bournemouth, United Kingdom

Added: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 10:18 GMT 11:18 UK

obviously not enough is being done to stop the spead of nuclear weapons, look at north korea for instance, detonated 2 underground nukes a few weeks ago that apparently can reach alaska.

Plus, if it is this big a problem, why dont they actually do something about it rather than talk. you can never fully trust anyone in this world of deceit and lies.

David