**In terms of nuclear warfare, it makes _some_ sense to be prepared for war in order to actually prevent it. Otherwise, I personally think if you want peace, prepare for peace.** - If we take the given that nuclear weapons, once introduced, are (at least for the time being) unable to be fully taken back from our world, there is the argument of [nuclear deterrence](https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2020/06/08/nuclear-deterrence-today/index.html) that I do sort of agree with: Maintaining an arsenal of nukes to keep live the threat of retaliation against any potential attack is a method for maintaining peace on a global scale. - Otherwise, I feel much more deeply that in the long run, aiming for peace through a quiet strength of compassion is much better than being a strong, forceful presence that pre-emptively defends itself against war by preparing for it or eventually undertaking it without a second thought. It may be necessary right now to defend against war pre-emptively and like this, but eventually, in the long run, I think it's quite possible we won't need to assume the worst of actors on the global stage. In which case, we can find that peace is the greatest preparer of itself.