Should Russia and the USA reduce the number of battlefield nuclear weapons both have?

"Sweden and Poland have urged the US and Russia to sharply reduce their arsenals of tactical nuclear weapons as negotiators resumed arms treaty negotiations in Geneva."

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index鈥?/a>

"Moscow and the US have been seeking a new nuclear arms reduction deal to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which expired in December."Should Russia and the USA reduce the number of battlefield nuclear weapons both have?
No, what if aliens attack?
Reducing the numbers of weapons is an option now that hostilities have eased since the end of the cold war. Removing them altogether is not an option, especially with Islamic nations becoming nuclear powers.Should Russia and the USA reduce the number of battlefield nuclear weapons both have?
No, we should look into the possibility of having another Cold War again in order to give the economy a major boost. Also, spy novels are lacking since the last one ended.
Yes they should. It is of no use trying to stop other countries, such as Iran, joining the nuclear club, whilst they hold such arsenals themselves.Should Russia and the USA reduce the number of battlefield nuclear weapons both have?
Yes...On the day after China and other nations begin to reduce the arsenals of their nuclear weapons, too.
yes- the cold war is over and both have a nucleur stockpile big enough to dstroy the world several times over like in terminator 3
They could fire them all at Swansea to get rid of them. Bye bye DVLA (plus a large chunk of Wales - obviously that's what the Americans call collateral damage)
Everyone with nuclear weapons should destroy them ! we have gotten far to paraniod over nuclear wars etc...
Sure...but as you may not know...the Russian's rarely follow through with commitments...
nah, they should just use em and do us all a favour.