The United States would be more powerful in a world without nuclear weapons. Even Henry Kissinger agrees.

America and the world would be wealthier without nuclear power. In a free market, without the subsidies nuclear power now receives, it is not economical.

Eliminating both is easier and safer than one or the other.

We would be stronger without nukes because countries like North Korea, Iran and Pakistan can create bombs, but can’t build aircraft carriers and high performance aircraft. In such a world, only the great powers could have ultimate weapons and great powers are more moderate because they have something to lose.

Nuclear power is not economical. We subsidize it by giving liability limits, just like British Petroleum. We also subsidize it by letting plants store radioactive waste in casks subject to terrorist attack. If they had to buy insurance for the full risk and had to safely get rid of the waste, no nuclear plant could be profitable. Having these plants is a perversion of the free market and makes us poorer. All other sources of energy are safer and better economically.

Eliminating both is easier than one or the other because then we could quarantine the entire process beginning at the pitchblende (uranium ore) mines. We know where they are from satellite imagery. We would then collect all the radioactive materials and grind it back into unuseable ore. Medical needs are small and could be tightly controlled.

No Nukes - America and the world would be

safer and wealthier.


Position PapersPosition_Papers.html

Stronger Without Nukes