I think it sounds more like an unprecedented power grab by the members of the United Unions eh... I mean United Nations, a Union might I add that largely operates with American dollars and very little from other nations. That said, I think it's clear the UN has outlived its useful purpose. 

If it weren't for the reality that no nation is going to give up it's nuclear threat deterrent, especially Russia or the USA, I think it's important for Russia and the USA to join to wipe out any other proliferation outside the direct control of the United States or Russia.

I hope that doesn't come off the wrong way, but I feel the bigger threats of Nuclear war come from smaller rouge nations with less accountability and less to lose. I think the smart money would be put on getting the nuclear weapons out of the hands of smaller countries and stopping any further research or armament.

What do you think?

The problem with Nukes guys, is that it doesn't matter who detonates what, wherever, the whole world cops the fall-out, & everyone loses. It's a bit like dropping a sour-fart in a crowded small room, you just can't avoid it unless you want to hold your breath & die...

We don't need Nukes !!!

What we need is a weapon that will obliterate a nation, but without the fall-out that takes millions of years to clean itself up. In reality, Nukes "are" useless.

I say spend Obama's trillion-dollar-grant in developing a new weapon that has the devastation of Nukes, but without the word-wide fall-out.

Biological weapons may me an alternative answer, as long as the active-agent is self-absorbent over time. eg. It dies within a couple of weeks of release.

What say ye ?....

( Hey PowerStroker, surely you know about that "plasma" weapon that fires at the aliens ? Check out the NASA footage of the last few shuttle flights...My guess is that a weapon like that could take care of an asteroid, if it scares aliens away ).

Cheers,

Rastus