>Each one worries me in a different way. Saddam Hussayn, I think we agree on this, is a dangerous person, so any weapons in his hands are dangerous.
>
>On the other hand, the weapons in the countries you mention - and in quite a few more! - make me worry by their sheer numbers - nothing close to which Iraq (which might otherwise be dangerous) is likely to achieve in the near future. I understand that there are enough weapons to destroy the entire planet several times. And don't forget the tremendous money wasted on all this - there was a time when the World used about a trillion dollars a year in weapons (I think this doesn't include other military expenditures) - resources which, in a united World, might be put to better uses.
>
>It might be argued that the countries you mentioned have responsible leadership. But who guarantees that this is really the case? For instance, the United States might be seized by a military dictatorship at any moment. This has happened in many countries in the past.

Very, very, very highly unlikely in this country. We have had something like 42 very peaceful transitions of power in our 200+ years.

>And an atomic war might be started almost accidentally.

Possibly.