It really depends on what country owns the nuclear weapons, if your country owns them, then the only thing you have to worry about is that it will go off by accident (Completely unlikely). But if it is an enemy country that owns them you have to watch out for nuclear attacks.
The Soviet Union lent Cuba nuclear missiles in order to protect the sovereignty of Cuba, a communist nation.
Because if there are political issues/differences then there is no point to trade with them. Ex:) The US put an embargo on Cuba because they pointed nuclear weapons at us.
Both Russia and the United States agreed to have less nuclear weapons in their countries after the cold war. This put both countries at ease.
No, the atomic bomb and depleted uranium are not the same thing. Nuclear weapons are made with enriched uranium or with plutonium as the fissionable material. Depleted uranium is uranium that is "left over" after natural uranium is put through a process called enrichment to inprove the concentration of the isotope U-235 over that in natural uranium. The enriched uranium with its higher percentage of U-235 is fissionable, and it can be used in nuclear reactors and in nuclear weapons. Depleted uranium is used to make armor-piercing projectiles, and can be put through the neutron flux in an operating reactor to be transformed (transmuted) into plutonium. Use the links below to related questions to learn more.
They began developing their own nuclear weapons and then in 1957 they put the worlds first satelite in space proving that they had the ability to deliver those weapons to any point on the planet. The first satelite was named Sputnik and it wasn't a weapon but it did show what the Soviet Union was capable of. They tested their first atomic bombs
Russia has nuclear weapons and a modern army. Japan has put the military aside since World War II.
The answer to this would vary depending on who you ask. Some people say that countries, cities, states, etc should not be able to have nuclear weapons because it is not only dangerous to the country that are the target, they also put that area they are located at in danger.
This is an example of an arms control agreement, specifically the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). The treaty aims to prevent the testing of nuclear weapons and the spread of nuclear weapons technology, contributing to global nuclear non-proliferation efforts.
This is actually a rather complicated situation.On the "yes" side: Japan certainly has the expertise, technology and equipment to construct nuclear weapons. They also have ready access to weapons-grade raw materials.On the "no" side: Japan has a non-nuclear policy (to be clear here: that refers to weapons, not reactors for generating power) and construction of nuclear weapons may be forbidden by their constitution (whether or not small "tactical" nuclear weapons would be forbidden is a question of interpretation). So far as is known, they've never conducted any nuclear weapons testing... and the US would almost certainly know if they had.Probably the best answer is: there's no particular reason to believe that Japan has nuclear weapons at this moment, but there's also no particular reason to believe they couldn't put one or more together on very short notice if they really wanted to.
Not as of 2018, but when they put a satellite into orbit they will have missiles with the range and payload capabilities needed to deliver nuclear warheads anywhere on earth.
The United States of America, and her allies, blundered into a war in a Iraq, thinking that Saddam Hussein had "weapons of mass destruction" (for example nuclear, biological, chemical weapons), when it fact Iraq did not have "weapons of mass destruction".
The answer you are most likely looking for is cuba.
Soviet Premier Khrushchev wanted to put nuclear weapons in Cuba, because the US had placed Nuclear weapons in West Germany, Greece, Turkey, Japan, and A few pacific islands. He wanted to equalize the strategic advantage
The United Nation has failed to put an end to terrorism. It has also failed to prevent the creation of nuclear weapons, which was one of its goals.
It depends a little bit on who "they" are, but artillery-launched tactical nuclear warheads are not only plausible, they have been made. Both the U.S. and the Soviet Union developed small, kiloton-range nuclear weapons for battlefield use. These weapons took the form of artillery cannon rounds and unguided rockets.
The Soviet Union lent Cuba nuclear missiles in order to protect the sovereignty of Cuba, a communist nation.
Yes. All countries with nuclear weaponry do, allies and enemies alike. Not just from land-based silos, but nuclear submarines can launch nuclear warheads from anywhere in the world's oceans.Nuclear weapons are not an offensive weapon, they are more or less a defensive weapon.Having nuclear weapons is a warning to your enemies. "We have nuclear weapons too, so if you drop a nuclear bomb on us, we can do the same to you".The only time they have been used as an offensive weapon is against Japan in World War Two. Nowadays they are just a method of defence, a psychological warning aimed at other countries with nuclear weaponry.However, other than a national defence method, nuclear weapons can also be used as a planetary defence method, to defend the Earth from asteroids on a crash-course with us. A multi-national effort can be put together amongst nuclear-ready nations to destroy the asteroid before it collides with Earth and wipes out all life.