Nations may want to retain or develop these weapons for various reasons, including deterrence against potential adversaries, maintaining a position of power and influence on the global stage, or as a means of defense in case of an attack by other countries. Having a nuclear, biological, or chemical arsenal can also act as a bargaining chip in international negotiations or provide a sense of security against perceived threats.
Nations may want to retain or develop an arsenal of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons for deterrent purposes to dissuade potential adversaries from attacking. Additionally, they may see these weapons as a means to protect their national interests and security in a world where other countries possess such weapons. Lastly, some countries may view these weapons as a way to maintain a position of strength and influence in global politics.
Nations may want to retain or develop these weapons for deterrence against potential threats from other countries, to maintain leverage in international relations, and to establish themselves as powerful players on the global stage. However, the use of these weapons is highly controversial and comes with significant ethical, humanitarian, and environmental risks.
Chemical warfare is considered a serious violation of international law and ethical standards, resulting in widespread condemnation. However, some nations still possess and deploy chemical weapons, using them as a deterrent or in conflict. The impact of chemical warfare can be devastating, causing mass casualties and long-term environmental damage.
Most countries have good developments in the field of chemistry. Most chemical-related advancements in science were in fact not made by a country, but by WHO (World Health Organisation), a branch of the United Nations.
Many people view it as unfair because developed nations have historically used biomagnifying compounds to advance their own industrialization, contributing to environmental damage, yet are now asking developing nations to restrict their use while continuing to benefit from past actions. This imbalance raises concerns about equity and the responsibility of developed nations to support sustainable development globally.
the dodgy ones
Nations may want to retain or develop an arsenal of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons for deterrent purposes to dissuade potential adversaries from attacking. Additionally, they may see these weapons as a means to protect their national interests and security in a world where other countries possess such weapons. Lastly, some countries may view these weapons as a way to maintain a position of strength and influence in global politics.
Nations may want to retain or develop these weapons for deterrence against potential threats from other countries, to maintain leverage in international relations, and to establish themselves as powerful players on the global stage. However, the use of these weapons is highly controversial and comes with significant ethical, humanitarian, and environmental risks.
Developed nations
Reducing trade barriers
Yes, of course!
Any answer to this question would be pure opinion, but I sincerely believe that nations should not have the freedom to develop nuclear weapons. The more nations that have them, the more likely it becomes that they will be used.
to allow industrialized countries to dominate developing nations
There is no one standard for all nations. In the US (and most NATO nations) chemical grenades are gray in color. Markings may be dark red, violet, or green, depending on the filler chemical.
united nations Aplus (nomad)
They want to reduce the cost of manufacturing by using inexpensive labor
Inspectors in Iraq found evidence of chemical weapons, biological weapons, and ballistic missiles in violation of United Nations resolutions. They also uncovered facilities and programs designed to develop weapons of mass destruction.