· Which countries have the biggest WMD stockpiles?

· Is it even feasible for the world to be free of these unethical nuclear weapons?

· Is it possible for the weapons to be destroyed?

· Technology has become so advanced that condemning the use of them and believing they should be removed could lead to a situation that is more unethical, as the country is defenceless and susceptible to attack.  This puts not only the country at risk but the people within?

· You say that weapons of mass destruction are unethical and not right, but if a ban was to be posed what would happen to all the stock piles of weapons that exist.  A weapons ban and thoroughgoing pacifism surely is a potentially suicidal policy, in that disarming and abandoning weapons is a massive national security threat?

· How much money is spent on this technology and research into development, surely whatever the cost it is necessary?

Approximately 8.7 billion are spent on research and development and the purchase of technologies every year.  We consider this amount unethical, especially as there are more pressing issues; such as climate change, access to clean water and loss of biodiversity that will have more immanent effects on the country, rather than engineering weapons of mass destruction.

 

· Surely the effect of weapons of mass destruction depends on the status of the earth.  If the earth has no status then weapons like these destroying areas are irrelevant?

 

· Are not international conventions and treaties enough to control the use and development of the weapons?

 

· What do individual governments have to do after they sign treaties?

Frequently Asked Questions

Analysing the social and ethical implications of military development

Military Technology Out of Control?