I'd be curious know how you'll revisit your opinion of "weapons of peace" when a nuclear nation is on the receiving end of a nuclear storm sent by some religious nut job.
The point is that it hasn't happened and probably never will. No nuclear armed country has ever been invaded. Despite all predictions to the contrary, there was never a World War III and it doesn't seem like there ever will be.
I was referring to exactly this sort of FUD. If there are conflicts between the nations and cultures of the world, the casualties can rest no blame on technologies or weapons, but on the ignorant attitudes and behaviors of people.
'nuclear storm' and 'religious nut job' are meaningless phrases designed to illicit fear and agreement with your viewpoint, not legitimate arguments.
Err? Did I miss something, or has the US actually been waging a war against terrorists for the past 12 years, where "terrorist" is euphemism for "extremist muslim nut job"?
As for nuclear storm, it's hardly meaningless FUD phrase. It's a tactic that basically stands for: "flatten the area". It's tried and tested, too. Think Dresden.
Else yeah. It depends on ignorant attitudes and behaviors. Of which one people in particular (the US) seems to have plenty.