That's the point where the analogy breaks down though, because the actors in the patent case are private actors rather than sovereigns. So if you e.g. abolish software patents the whole problem disappears, but nobody can "abolish" nuclear weapons because they're a consequence of the laws of physics rather than the laws of the United States.

If humans had the power to amend the laws of physics to make nuclear weapons impossible and yet nuclear physicists lobbied against it, then they would be in the same position as patent lawyers.

not quite. The scientists didnt like what they were doing and were driven by making sure that thier side was best equipped.

Patent lawyers just make money. Go to trial? Pay up (even if you loose) Need a new patent? Pay up. Want to enforce your existing patent? Pay up. Want to check to see if someone is infringing on your patents? Pay up. The lawyers, more or less are neutral benefactors of the patent wars.