OPINION:
Thank you, David S. Jonas and Patrick Rhoads, for your balanced view on nuclear weapons (“War is hell: The moral case for nuclear weapons,” web, Aug. 29).
Messrs. Jonas and Rhoads rightly point out that modern second-guessing of President Harry Truman’s 1945 decision to use nuclear weapons serves no useful purpose. They conclude that Truman recognized that nuclear weapons could be used to end wars, not just continue them.
Despite the change from a bipolar world in which only the Western and Eastern allies possessed nuclear capabilities to the current, multipolar situation, nuclear deterrence has avoided the further use of these potentially civilization-ending weapons.
Messrs. Jonas and Rhoads mention those who advocate abolishing nuclear weapons, together with the surprising suggestion that the U.S. could support such an effort (with the provision that it be permanent, stable and verifiable).
But for the foreseeable future, to avoid the use of the proliferated nuclear warheads, we must rely on deterrence. Nuclear weaponry is far from an exact science, with many facets we need to better understand before we can reasonably rely on it.
In the meantime, the task facing incoming administrations is to ensure that we maintain and improve our deterrent posture. We can do this by supporting active programs for our nuclear offensive and defensive capabilities.
STANLEY ORMAN
Rockville, Maryland
Please read our comment policy before commenting.