Thesis and anti-thesis are of course a very concise excerpt of the general picture , which could be, and has been, elaborated extensively.
Yes, the question of out-weighing human lifes is terribly hypocritical. Knowingly accepting collateral damage to this (or actually any) extent is in-humane, though unfortunately not in-human. Nonetheless the “excuse” is still propagated.
The “50-years-of-peace” is an egocentrical view. The war theatre “western civilization” was at peace – though the warring partners of this same civilization were battling on other fields outside their immediate geographical area.
Would there have been a war, had there not been nuclear weapons? Honestly, nobody knows – but in the sixties it came darn too close for my liking (’63 in Cuba and ’68 in Czechoslovakia).
Once a technology exists, and this is not only true for military technology, there will always be someone who will want to use it, and who will seek – and find – “very good” reasons to do so.
So – no, I do not feel safe with the knowledge that nuclear weapons exist. I would want them banned, and tight controls over the possibilities of re-building them. And I would not have any problem with policing anyone who would try. And I would not feel less safe, when, and if, they are gone, as I am convinced that there are other means to preserve peace in our times.
Unfortunately I also see that there is not a common interest in doing so. Always and everywhere where there was a conflict, there were profiteers, power seekers, and governments that propagate the “balance of power”.
Does that answer the question whether we “need” nuclear weapons? Not really. I fail to find a logic reason for having them, even less for keeping them. Every potential reason I could think of, I could also find a hypothetical non-nuclear alternative. However on a practical political side, I fear that it’ll be hard to find anybody relevant (!) to make the first step in renouncing nuclear weapon power.
Philosophically, mankind could be beyond that, and really live humanity – in real life mankind is voracious. One of the salient characteristics of mankind is its versatility, and its antagonisms – it has its Ghandis, but also its Bushes.
I have a vision, that other “intelligent” life exists in the universe, and we will meet. The mere fact that they appear on earth would prove their technological superiority, which allowed bridging universal distances. This could be the trigger to unite mankind as inhabitants of Sol III - planet Earth.
But even then, somebody will say – you know, we have this destructive power. Let’s build a weapon, just in case – we may need it to defend ourselves – we will never use it, of course, the mere threat…
Homo homine lupus est – Man is the wolf of man.
In times of crisis it is of the utmost importance not to lose your head (Marie Antoinette)
