Conventional weapons as dangerous as nuclear weapons

The United States needs to stop worrying about PakistanâÄôs nuclear weapons and whether they will fall into the hands of someone who will not be responsible with them. The United States should start worrying about its own irresponsible use of conventional weapons in Iraq, Afghanistan and now western Pakistan. Is the daily irresponsible use of conventional weapons, where you kill a large number of civilians over a long period of time, not as bad as the irresponsible use of nuclear weapons where you kill many civilians in one act? Recent U.S. military airstrikes have killed Iraq and Afghanistan civilians. It all depends on where you live when someone claims that âÄúour weapons are in safe hands.âÄù People in Iraq, Afghanistan and western Pakistan do not believe, as we do, that our weapons are in safe hands. If the Taliban did get some nuclear capability, it would make people in Afghanistan a lot safer because the United States would then think twice before launching their reckless military assaults. Whether weapons are in safe hands all depends on where you live. Frank Erikson Minneapolis resident