[zeveb]

> The Americans, he told Moscow, were not in any way interested in disarmament. Rather, they were training their armed forces to integrate nuclear weapons into their military doctrine.

Of course, disarmament doesn't really make sense: once science has discovered something, it can't be undiscovered. Integrating every new discovery into one's doctrine (even if that integration is, 'we'd rather not') is far more mature than pretending something doesn't exist.

[dghf]

I'm in the middle of reading _Command and Control_ by Eric Schlosser: if it is to be believed, then in the immediate wake of Hiroshima and Nagasaki there was a widely held opinion (possibly approaching a consensus) even among the upper ranks of the US armed forces that atomic weapons should either be banned outright or placed under the sole control of a world authority, maybe even a world government.

Curtis LeMay (IIRC) stated that those two were by far the preferable options: but failing those, it was imperative that the US had "the best, the biggest, and the most".

[xyzzy123]

Disarmament can make sense from a game theoretic point of view if the parties involved can verify destruction of weapons, and monitor production.