3 ms·
Arms control diplomacy has never managed to get everyone on board with full ratification all at once. Doesn't mean it doesn't make a difference, especially as t
by ahelwer 4y ago
Arms control diplomacy has never managed to get everyone on board with full ratification all at once. Doesn't mean it doesn't make a difference, especially as the years go on. Using widely-banned weapons in a conflict has more-severe diplomatic repercussions than invasion by conventional means.
- anigbrowl 4y agoUp to a point. As far as nukes go, the main reason for having one is as a deterrent to conventional attacks. Sure, you can try to starve people out, but sanctions regimes often run out of moral legitimacy before their targets do. And countries like Iran or North Korea that are near to or in possession of a nuclear capability are not going to cast it away. Gaddafi did that and look how poorly it turned out for him.