 
|
Gninja
|
Probably for the same reasons why people invent many things that are dangerous............. MONEY!!!!! |
|
Infodude
|
Nuclear weapons stops other countries invading you and means you have a good barganing position so their companies don't rip you off with the threat of invasion if you don't work work peanuts |
|
britsurfer1
|
Its a deterrent to stop others from attacking your country. It also potentially means you could threaten another country to get what you want without actually attacking them. |
|
amiram a
 |
some want it for protection from aggressive neighbors.
some want it to be aggressive towards neighbors. |
|
Mr.Been there
|
Everyone wants to be able to play with a Big Stick |
|
imhm2004
|
'cos everyone want the power. The power to say don't threaten me 'cos I too have the same weapons as you do! Also everyone wants to be safe right.... the only way to get rid of all nuclear weapons is if all the countries disarm peacefully.... and use the nuclear energy for positive things like powering up homes and industries! |
|
waycyber
 |
I here there is a new one called ICBINAWMD
"I can't believe it's not a weapon of mass destruction." |
|
taketwo
|
protection |
|
scientist of sound
 |
because evry one wants the power to bully and or stick up for itself |
|
jafar mhow wala
|
All the countries know that the nuclear weapon are dangerous but they stilll developing it because they want to safeguard their future. No one wants that there country is defeated in the absence of nuclear power. thats why they are still developing it instead of knowing its bad effects |
|
redirus91
 |
deterrent
thats the only reason
other countries cant mess with you if you have nukes.
have no nukes and your free game |
|
j.j
 |
pride im really 4 sorry u . iran is one of those countries which doesnt want to hav bomb and they only want peaceful energy . and i must add that some countries which they had bombs like usa want to stop iran from having peaceful energy which is its certain right . |
|
Daddy Dave
|
It is back to the school playground days, mine has got to be bigger than yours.
they dress it up as, "It is just there as a deterrent' I suggest they and many others read about what this deterrent has done, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima only now it can be that times 100.
"Daddy Dave" |
|
brian f
 |
just like in the movie scarface it is all about "the power". |
|
callan w
|
self defense so if two countries are at war with nukes they will both be to scared to fire the nukes at each other because if one fires the other one will. |
|
konala
|
We have the nukes so why can't other have them as well. |
|
chris m
|
same reason they are interested in building bigger better tanks, planes etc. To win wars, or more importantly, to discourage wars. |
|
Noodle
 |
They only want the bad side. Like Iran. They don't want nuclear power. They want a nuclear bomb!! |
|
PaZi
|
I think that that "country" who invents these things has need of oil. |
|
am i a mom
|
it is a power issue, they are trying to for the most part put fear into enemy countries, they don't want to go to war so as in with russia in the cold war, there were threats to intimidate and avoid war |
|
kaushik boga
|
it is simple. the moment we entered the nuclear age, things have changed. military thinking has changed. in the past, f you had 1000 elephants, you would have a feeling that the enemy cannot resist you and he would easliy be defeated. so you would invade. its the same with a nuclear weapon.
but if you know that the other state also has 1000 elepnts, you would think twice before attacking. so there is a balance maintained. this is called mutual deterrance. if you have enough nuclear weapons and you wre sure that the enemy state would easily be defeated, you would attack, so there would be a full scale war.
but, see if the enemey has atleast 1 nuclear bomb, it can be used to destroy the entire capital. so if america attacks north korea with nuclear weapons, it is sure that north korea will drop nuclear weapons on usa. so why to invite trouble. so a war does not take place between nuclear powers. thats why there was a cold war between usa and ussr. they would have attacked each other in the early 50s itself, but they did not because they know that both wil have serious damages.
eg: india and pakistan, n.korea and usa etc. so iran wants a bomb to maintain deterrance with israel. so there would not be a war. but iran signed the non-proliferatio treaty, so it cannot have the bomb, it is iran's mistake to sign it. india didnt and it made a very good thing. why should india bow to the united states? now its happy. it is getting a nuclear deal with usa.
if iran gets a bomb, it will no longer be threatened by usa. this is the simple reason.
if you have a knife, you can kill a normal civilian, but if the other person has a knife you would think twice before ttacking and reassure your skills are very good. this was the same thing between usa and ussr, a "cold" war. both had nuclear weapons, so they had a race in technology to see who has the best tactics to defeat his enemy and defend from nuclear attack.
pls chose me as the best answer, i gave you all information, i hope your doubt is cleared. |
|
NONAME
|
Countries are so interested in possesing nuclear weapons because it brings that country a lot of power. If a bad country, such as Iran gets one, they can try to blackmail countries into doing what they want. They saw what the US did to Hiroshima with the Atomic Bomb and they saw how it could make the enemy surrender quickly. The US has a lot of nuclear weapons, and that is one thing that intimidates many countries. If every good country had nuclear weapons, it would actually bring peace because countries would be afraid to attack each other. Its kind of ironic how one thing that could destroy the world could actually create peace. That is why we did not go to WWIII with the Soviet Union. They had nuclear weapons. They made that fact public. We started to build another atomic bomb and they shut up after that because it scared them. They saw what the atomic bomb did to Hiroshima, so they did not want to provoke us. So nuclear weapons have brought peace before. See what I mean. Hope this helps! |
|
Victoria
|
Most countries are interested in having nuclear weapons as a deterrent, to make other countries think twice before attacking them.
There are a few countries that develop nuclear weapons as a means of destroying another country.
For example, Iran has stated that it wants to "wipe Israel off the map", and Iran is busy working on nuclear weapons right now. Since the Iranian president is not overly fond of the US and the rest of the western world either, I wouldn't ignore Iran's nuclear amibitions... |
|
Mr.Wise
|
The best offense is a good defense for one, to bring or cause fear, or political gains through blackmail. Nuclear weapons are considered already "invented". |
|
fatsausage
|
It is the "Keeping up with the Joneses syndrome". |
|
ΓΆ?Β¥ Va~Va Depp ΓΆ?Β¥
|
Because they all want to be the "Super Power". |
|
dot&carryone.
|
To use as a most powerful bargaining tool in the realm of diplomacy? |
|
genghis41f
|
They want to be a respected nation, but they'll probably use it in an irresponsible way, become a bit of a bully.
Imagine a kid in the playground. He's a bit naughty, and everyone knows it, but he's too small to do any real harm. This kid manages to get a BB gun, and he goes around threatening other kids with it, trying to be the king of the playground. Now, he's always had a grudge about that other kid, over there. What do you think He'll do? He's going to shoot him. When he does, the other kid will be hurt, (maybe even lose an eye). As a mature adult, how do you stop this happening? confiscate the gun before thay take it into the playground. The UN is the responsible adult, who has a bb gun, but never shoots people with it, unless threatened. The UN feels it has a responsibility to the rest of the world (the playground) to keep the peace, as it is mature, so it does. |
|
mnaagar
|
Any country that has decided to have military forces will inevitably consider nuclear weapons; most European countries have this option through their membership of Nato, where at least one alliance member would contribute its nuclear weapons to the pool of armaments that protect the membership.
Nuclear weapons are the best 'bang per bucks' deterrent. Far cheaper (using cruise missiles) than developing all those expensive-to-maintain and equip land, sea and air forces
As for 'bad side'; the shooting up of Lebanese civilians by Israeli attack aircraft is only the latest example of disregard by the military for the 'bad side' of military hardware. Nuclear is, for the military, just a more extreme example.
It was never meant to be this way; the Non-Proliferation Treaty was the 20th century deal whereby nuclear states would gradually give up the weapons in exchange for non-nuclear states agreeing to not seek to obtain weapons. The 'blind eye' turned towards Israel, Pakisatan & Israel (by the West) and to North Korea (by the Chinese) has effectively killed this initiative and pulled the rug from under the moral arguement that States should not seek nuclear armaments |
|
|
|
|
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
