you're in here to argue it is contrary to international law or even to have in one's ass it is this rippon because the purpose of the weapons to use it either as a threat or as an actual weapon the nuclear powers or alliances like nato still rely on nuclear deterrence which is threat and so the fight continues i was on a panel with a senior advisor to the british government about nuclear policy and he's pro nuclear. and we were debating about. the world court opinion and whether nuclear deterrence was legal and he was extremely cynical he said that . it was a mistake to go into the courts but governments would ignore it and that's true they have. and the other thing he relied on all the time was he said and of course we never actually will have to use them and this to me is the heart of the problem for the people who brought you to terms is that if they try to claim a level use nuns terrorist doesn't work we're meant he would argue that terence does mean use of it is a use of a nuclear weapon to actually threaten to use them and that's when you into the will cause the first time you've fou