# data[].attributes.body
General Hyten discusses why he believes the world is safer with nuclear weapons. He gives a good arguement saying that there hasn’t been a global conflict such as world war 2 since countries started making nuclear warheads.

# data[].attributes.body
The cartoon shows that both sides are refraining from using nuclear weapons so the other side won’t use them either. This shows that if everyone has nuclear weapons then no one will use them due to the fear of retaliation.

# data[].attributes.body
this article talks about how even though we have different treaties that people do not follow them. It also goes over how nuclear weapons do not deter  nuclear attacks.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture show so  town after it was nuked and it says that it can happen anywhere. It then promotes the use of nuclear weapons on other countries which could actually lead to a much larger and deadlier outcome.

# data[].attributes.body
In this article Eben interviews Alan Robock, who Is a preofessor that lead a study to determine the effects of nuclear war on the entire planet.  Even small scale nuclear warms could lower global temperature, kill crops, and kill millions, and even billions or people worldwide.

# data[].attributes.body
Post nuclear war is even more devastating than the initial bombing. After the bombs are dropped, survivors of the explosion would be affected by radiation, food shortages, a nuclear winter, and the water would even be contaminated.

# data[].attributes.body
As time goes on people are looking for more precise ways to win wars which means smaller weapons. This leads to the nuclear weapons never being used again because the bombs are not only messy when killing the enemy, but they destroy everything in the vicinity as well as affect our own troops.

# data[].attributes.body
Countries that’s use nuclear threats as deterrents are actually causing more problems. Studies have shown that nuclear deterrents can lead to much deadlier conflicts or more conflicts.

# data[].attributes.body
Obama argued that to maintain national security that we need nuclear weapons as long as our adversaries have them. This includes using them on our opponents if they use theirs.

# data[].attributes.body
At the end of WWII after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. and Russia started a nuclear race. For about 40-50 years they developed tens of thousands of bombs, none were ever used on anyone however. This period of time came to be known as the Cold War. Since then several countries have added nuclear weapons to their arsenal and many countries are trying to completely rid the world of them. Today there are debates over whether or not the world isn’t safer with or without nuclear weapons.

# data[].attributes.body
Today, with nuclear weapons around, the world is less safe than before. Nuclear weapons do more than just affect those who are bombed, they affect the whole world. Nuclear radiation affects water, land, temperatures, and it can poison and kill all life as we know it. Just like in the article about the post nuclear war affects, the results would be so catastrophic that it could even have the potential to wipe out everyone even from across the world. The other article that talks about using the weapons as deterrents also states that it is causing more problems than we know. Other political leaders become more tempted to launch their bombs on countries who whose them as deterrents due to the fact that countries use these weapons as a way to agitate other countries. The longer they are around can also lead to the higher risk of using the weapons as well. In the end, we don’t need nuclear wepons because there are better ways to fight wars, and in the end it won’t  wipe out all of humanity. These bombs make the world less safe as time goes on, which means that we need to address this issue before it is to late.

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear weapons will ever be completely gone. In order to make the world safer, nuclear weapons should stay in the hands of countries and should be kept out of the hands of radical groups ans organizations. This would keep the idea of deterrence alive because countries wouldn’t want to attack a countries when they would just be blown up as well. However radical groups don’t have defined borders which means that they could be spread throughout the world.