Nuclear weapons are here to stay.

Sorry it took so long"I have heard much wishful musing over the years about the total elimination of the world's nuclear stockpiles. However, I contend that this will not occur, unless a more destructive or effective weapon is found. I thought I made it clear that this resolution is a response to unrealistic peacenicks."Yeah but you cant just omit one of the biggest reasons why nukes may be done away with just because you want to. Thats like making a debate about how the courts never convict innocent people but your not allowed to cite cases where somebody was actually later found to be innocent. Point is that One day there will be a more effective/accurate/deadly weapon then nuclear bombs, and when that weapon comes it would sooner or later, along with other more advanced weapondry, lead to the disarmament of all nukes. "Nukes are obsolete since they kill too many civilians. That's the goal of terrorists."And how much of the worlds population do terrorists make up percentage wise? like .01%? Just because .01% of the world still sees nukes as the best weapon to kill civilians it doesnt mean those people will have the means or ability to even use such a weapon. Also once the next big weapon comes along even terrorists will move on from nukesEmpire Building"WWII still has two nations technically at war. [1]"Yeah, the war ended in an informal ceasefire 60 years ago... "Communism has always had as it's goal the overthrow of all other powers.[2,3]"Not in either your wikipedia source or your source leading to some random Russian military awards website says that communism's goal is to overthrow all the other powers...."Duration doesn't matter. Russia added South Ossetia and Abkhazia to it's empire this way."" Russia began pulling most of its troops out of uncontested Georgia. Russia established buffer zones around Abkhazia and South Ossetia and created checkpoints in Georgia's interior. These forces were eventually withdrawn from uncontested Georgia"http://en.wikipedia.org..."Russia has supported South Ossetia and another breakaway region, Abkhazia, as quasi-satellites since the wars in the 1990s ended in stalemates"http://topics.nytimes.com...Point is, they are independent and not under Russian Rule"Success does not negate motive."If you get your a** kicked hard enough it will certainly deter other nations from tryingUse of heavy bombing in warfare"I've provided examples of how recent conflicts involved heavy bombing."None of which are less than 30 years old...."Just because 2 recent wars have not used it does not mean it is obsolete"It certainly makes it look that way. If a very highly used tactic in many wars is not being used in other more modern wars, then it means it is becoming obsolete. "What major countries that have the ability for heavy bombing have abandoned thier bomber fleets because thier role is obsolete? We still have plenty of B-52s."You realize that B-52's are used for way more than just huge bombing runs right? "in a conventional conflict, the B-52H can perform air interdiction, offensive counter-air and maritime operations. During Desert Storm, B-52s delivered 40 percent of all the weapons dropped by coalition forces. It is highly effective when used for ocean surveillance, and can assist the U.S. Navy in anti-ship and mine-laying operations. Two B-52s, in two hours, can monitor 140,000 square miles (364,000 square kilometers) of ocean surface."http://www.fas.org...Cold War" It didn't turn into all out war many times because of nuclear deterrent. A reason for nuclear bombs to persist."And when the next big weapon comes along, then it will serve the role of deterrent of war while nukes get scrappedPakistan and India"2010 was one of the bloodiest years of the conflict[6]"Your source only shows that 117 people died in 2010 as a result of clashes between protesters and police, it surely was not the result of clashes between the two powers."I know of no effective weapon that was willingly eliminated from existence by its users without a suitable replacement. "South Africa got rid of ALL its nukes back in 1994, meanwhile the US and Russia have continually disarmed over the yearshttp://allafrica.com...My point is, Nuclear weapons came at a time where they were designed to kill as many civilians as possible. However war has evolved to be more precise and minimize civilian losses, so the heavy bombing seen in the days of WWII and Vietnam are long gone. Nuclear Weapons are a relic of destruction in an age where accuracy and precision define how wars are fought, and nuclear weapons dont fit into this new style of war. Nukes havent been used in decades, the biggest nations are disposing of them, one already has gotten completely rid of them tooNukes are NOT here to stayThanks for the debate :D