[llm_nerd]

I mean...why not? What moral right does the US have to nuclear weapons that others don't? US exceptionalism?

Just looking at what is happening in the US right now -- an astonishingly corrupt banana republic increasingly led by an insane Christian nationalist movement that bizarrely doesn't seem to understand a thing about Christ's teachings -- I have more faith in North Korea's management of nuclear weapons than the US.

Nuclear non-proliferation relied upon a global order where borders were fixed and there was in essence an international law and detente. Now we have an America openly musing about militarily taking countries and land as if it's just casual talk.

Yes, everyone should have nuclear weapons. And many of them should be pointed at US cities. The US is undeniably the most dangerous nation on Earth right now, and has lost any and all credibility as a rational player.

[p2detar]

Exactly. I can bet that every country on the world having a nuclear bomb would actually make the world a safer place. We are still primitive, so the threat of us being destroyed at any time should keep us at bay.

No country that holds nukes should be considered a pillar of morality. That's stupid beyond belief.

[almatabata]

That is assuming everyone has a working survival instinct. Religious fanatics notoriously do not have this instinct. You just need one country with a religious fanatic at its head, who thinks that it is better we all go to heaven than to let evil win, and boom.

Now you can you argue the current US president is a fanatic if you want. But I do not see how adding more bombs to more countries reduces the odds of nuclear warfare in the future.

The current equilibrium has worked well enough. I do not see why we need to hand over nuclear weapons to countries currently embroiled in bloody civil wars.

[dinkumthinkum]

Where is this ruling insane Christian nationalist movement? I don't see one. Are you just talking about people that think men are physically more dominant at sports and other physical activities, that is insane? I think that's what all of the world thought for thousands of years and probably 99% or more of people in the world think today. This is just more the Henny Penny stuff that I don't think helps the left much.

[mckn1ght]

The Christian nationalist movement are the people saying things like “Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason, and that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness” - Trump

[dinkumthinkum]

That’s not “Christian nationalism”. Sorry. That’s a pretty light religious take on a life or death event; that’s pretty milquetoast.

[mckn1ght]

So in this thread you’ve got reflexive denial, appeal to antiquity, appeal to popularity, and now no true scotsman. You’re really on a roll!

[dinkumthinkum]

I think you like naming fallacies without knowing what they are. That is a common tactic among Flat Earthers (oh I'm sure I'll be hit with another charge here). It is is not "No True Scotsman" to say that it is hyperbolic to suggest that say that statement was Christian nationalism.

[mckn1ght]

You asked for an example, and then when presented with one, said, no, that’s not really an example.

Your argument to antiquity: “that's what all of the world thought for thousands of years”

Your argument to popularity: “probably 99% or more of people in the world think today”

Not that you’re trying to use those points in a cogent way. You heard “christian nationalist” and proceeded to attack a strawman of gender advantage, which has nothing to do with it. I gave you a salient example, and you went off with a half cocked opinion, conveniently sidestepping any further discussion of the actual implications.