Your argument is wrong on the merits alone. If Communists in the US hadn’t stolen designs for the USSR, then proliferation could have been slowed or possibly pr

Your argument is wrong on the merits alone. If Communists in the US hadn’t stolen designs for the USSR, then proliferation could have been slowed or possibly prevented. Nukes on both sides led to a decades long Cold War that cost real lives and by all rights should have gone hot several times. UK or French nukes didn’t stabilize Europe nor make the USSR (or any other country I’m aware of) less likely to attack them. Pakistan and India continue to wage a Cold War hoping that the fundamentalists in Pakistan don’t gain too much power. The situation is just as unstable as before. Nukes in the PRK haven’t made the situation more stable. All peace deals were unrelated. In truth, the real threat has always been the hundreds of guns pointed at Seoul. They’ve actually destabilized relations with countries like Japan which has slowly moved toward arming again. That leaves just PRC. You could make the case that it stabilized the fighting between India and China to some degree, but fighting and border disputes still continues to cause suffering and death. It certainly hasn’t done a thing to lessen tensions with the rest of the South Pacific or the US where tensions simply continue to climb. Can you point to any places where the nine nuclear countries have stabilized regions because of nukes?