While it seems that neoconservaties view nuclear disarmament with inimical scorn, it would seem to me that when taken to it’s logical extreme, and in fact, conclusion, a world without nuclear weapons would be a greater boon to global U.S. dominance than one with their existence. As the third most populous nation in the world who accounts for roughly half of the world’s defense spending, the United States would be uniquely positioned to engage in as much neo-colonial hegemony and Cold War era blustering as the size of our military would allow. It’s obvious that everyone understands the equalizing nature of a nuclear warhead, which is why we rightly spend so much time trying to figure out how to keep them away from failed states and terrorist organizations, so the question is: does the U.S. possess greater military dominance in a world with or without nuclear warheads? For the reasons I mentioned above, it follows that pursuing a world with no nuclear weapons at all would be more advantageous than pursuing a world with nuclear weapons, even if they are only held by the right parties.
UPDATE: A commenter points out that no on has been able to convince Russia, but I’d add a world with no nukes would be massively beneficial to Russia as well, again given their size and defense capabilities.