Second installment of campus nuclear policy survey

Nuclear weapons have typically been used in deterring a nation, also in possession of nuclear weapons, from using them. Historically, deterrence has been very successful in preventing the usage of nuclear weapons, but hardly successful in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to other countries. From the political standpoint, the threat of nuclear force can be a convincing bargaining chip; however, their justification becomes a much more difficult argument because the practical uses of nuclear weapons are few when compared to what can be accomplished with conventional weapons. Many say history has revealed that possessing these great weapons neither prevents disastrous wars nor does it guarantee victory. What contingencies could arise where nuclear weapons could accomplish a goal that conventional weapons could not?

For the results and analysis of last week?s survey, please see page A3.

1. In your opinion, what circumstances would warrant the use of a nuclear weapon by the United States? (select all that apply)

a) to retaliate against a nuclear attack on the U.S. or one of its allies by another nation
b) to retaliate against a chemical or biological weapon attack on the U.S. or one of its allies by another nation
c) to retaliate against a nuclear attack on the U.S. or one of its allies by a terrorist group
d) to eliminate a covert WMD program by a rogue state
e) there are no appropriate uses

1. For the purposes you identified in the first question, what would be an appropriate number of weapons for the United States to maintain to accomplish these objectives?

a) 7500
b) 3750
c) 2000
d) 1000
e) 500
f ) 100
g) 0