NPT has three serious flaws

Support for NPT makes at least three fundamental errors in logic.
1. Even if all nation states agree to rid the world of all nukes…
a. There is little chance it will be verifiable …or be verified under the current ‘national sovereignty is supreme’ condition the world now operates under.
b. There is no reasonable means to verify non-state actors won’t succeed in obtaining one or more.
c. It is probable that one or more nations will cheat…and lie about it.
2. If all nuclear weapons are successfully eliminated
a. Other means of mass murder (biological, chemical and conventional weapons) can be more lethal, cheaper and easier to develop, hide, and deliver -- without warning or leaving a return address.
b. In the future there may be a need for nuclear weapons (blasting asteroids or alien invaders).
3. It assumes that its successful passage and attempted enforcement will make us safer. Efforts to enforce it could lead to war (see Iraq. See Iran.) At the very best some people may be safer from nuclear incineration, but the world will be increasingly vulnerable to other means of mass destruction as long as the human desire to mass murder exists.
Bottom line: Elimination of all nuclear weapons is a noble goal and possibly even achievable if all nations and all humans support it. But there are far more lethal weapons that cannot be controlled, even with the most intrusive and expansive global inspection regime possible. Ultimately efforts to control the means of mass destruction will fail miserably. It would be far wiser to invest precious time, energy and resources in dramatically limiting the human desire to use any WMD. That would require global justice, education and universal enforcement of other basic inalienable human rights (see UDHR).