Introduction
Since the deployment of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, the world has been threatened by nuclear weapons. Although there has not been a nuclear accident, the risk of having one is not impossible. Presently the world has enough nuclear warheads to wipe out all civilization. As technology advanced, more sophisticated and deadly nuclear weapons were built. More countries have nuclear capabilities than there were 50 years ago. As dangerous as nuclear weapons may seem, many have believed that nuclear deterrence had prevented danger of war during period of Cold War. Now that the cold war has ended and Russia is struggling in their economy and the relationship between US and Russia has improved, should nuclear weapons be abolished and is this abolition possible?
History in brief
The history of nuclear weapons began with the discovery of radioactivity elements, radium, polonium and uranium. These in turn led two German scientists, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman, to the discovery of nuclear fission and fusion. During the World War II the German’s active research on atomic bomb had prompted the US to secretly build the atomic bomb. The first atomic device was exploded at a site near Alamogordo New Mexico on July 16, 1945. This successful test had lead both US and Britain to believe and agree that the atomic bomb could bring a about Japanese’ surrender without an invasion and without Soviet’s help. The first atomic bomb was dropped in Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 followed by another in Nagasaki, Japan in August 9, 1945. The atomic bombs killed 140,000 civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Despite the manifestation of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the building of atomic bombs continu...
... middle of paper ...
...clear weapons will free all humanity from the danger of a nuclear war, banning of nuclear weapons would seem to be too optimistic. Firstly, the knowledge of building nuclear weapons cannot be erased forever. Secondly illegal production of nuclear weapon is a possible even a ban had been issued. Lastly, nuclear weapons are regarded as the devices that are able to protect one's homeland from any invasions. This belief is further emphasized in our nuclear deterrence strategy, thus abolition of nuclear does not seem possible in the near future. We can only depend on more effective treaties that will regulate the production and research on nuclear weapons.
Presently, the US and Russia had agreed to reduce each deployed strategic nuclear arsenal to between 1700 and 2000 by 2020. This can be seen a good starting point toward the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons.
Scott D. Sagan, the author of chapter two of “More Will Be Worse”, looks back on the deep political hostilities, numerous crises, and a prolonged arms race in of the cold war, and questions “Why should we expect that the experience of future nuclear powers will be any different?” The author talks about counter arguments among scholars on the subject that the world is better off without nuclear weapons. In this chapter a scholar named Kenneth Waltz argues that “The further spread of nuclear weapons may well be a stabilizing factor in international relations.” He believes that the spread of nuclear weapons will have a positive implications in which the likely-hood of war decreases and deterrent and defensive capabilities increase. Although there
The Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the first and current only use of nuclear weapons in wartime history. This weaponry had been a project conducted by the United States, and was tested in the final stages of World War Two, on Japan. Working in collaboration with the United Kingdom and Canada, the Manhattan project marked the construction of this weaponry. The general research had originally begun in 1939 and was developed in fear of the Germans having their own atomic bombs. With the defeat of Germany in May 1945, plans began to use the atomic bombs against Japan. The Hiroshima bomb, known as Little Boy was a ‘gun-type fission weapon’ with a rare isotope of uranium-235. The Nagasaki bomb, known as the Fat Man was an ‘implosion-type nuclear weapon using plutonium-239, this bomb was proved to be more powerful and efficient. The releasing of such weaponry caused catastrophic destruction, despite their minimal efficiency and many have argued if this design should have been put into action. The side which is supported throughout the discussion will be the bombs should have been dropped.
University of Bath. 2005. ‘Babyish’ Barbie under attack from little girls, study shows. [press release] 19 December 2005. http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/releases/barbie161205.html
Martin, Melanie. “Negative Effects of Barbie on Girls.” eHow. Demand Media, n.d. Web. 14 Feb. 2014.
Also today is the danger that life is extinguished on earth through such a horrible weapon , not over. Many states are in possession of nuclear bombs , because that means for them power. Even dictatorships and unjust regime like China and North Korea have nuclear weapons.
Although WW II ended over 50 years ago there is still much discussion as to the events which ended the War in the Pacific. The primary event which historians attribute to this end are the use of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although the bombing of these cities did force the Japanese to surrender, many people today ask “Was the use of the atomic bomb necessary to end the war?” and more importantly “Why was the decision to use the bomb made?” Ronald Takaki examines these questions in his book Hiroshima.
At the request of many who say that Barbie gives an overly sexualized image of women to children, Barbie has undergone several breast reductions and waist-widening modifications to make her more acceptable not in the eyes of children, but in the eyes of the children’s parents. Even though her height has remained rather irrelevant through her 55 years of being alive, Barbie has been produced with several different feminine physiques and many different skin colors in an attempt to satisfy outraged people. She started out as a fashion doll that needed unrealistic proportions to help her numerous outfits fit better, but somewhere along the way her harmless journey became stained with the accusations of feminists. Even after takin...
Humanity has reached a point where they now wield weapons that they aren’t capable of controlling. History has proven their potential power of causing massive murders. Today countries bicker over their weapons like kids and their toys. It’s obvious nukes need to be banned, otherwise the result will be beyond our control.
...gers, the United States continues to spend billions of dollars on military endeavors. The dogmas of the stormy past will no longer suffice for the calm future. Being the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons in anger, I believe that the United States needs to be the first nation to drop its nuclear armament count to zero.
When the United States caught word that Germany was close to creating the atomic bomb, J. Robert Oppenheimer and other scientists wanted to create it first, for the U.S. After three years of research, the first small atomic device was exploded on July 16, 1945 in the lab at Los Alamos. Having proved their concept worked, a larger scale bomb was built. Less than a month later, atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan (Rosenberg).
A nuclear weapon in current society places great danger and risk on our states, even though the creating and usage for a nuclear weapon at the time was to ultimately uphold state security for the duration of the cold war, by states keeping nuclear weapon was a way of assuring security. After the cold war, the idea of having security ‘Nuclear Weapon’ decreased chances of getting threats from other states this installed confidence amongst states, nevertheless dependence on the nuclear weapon for protection is gradually becoming dangerous.
Should all countries in the world be able to develop their own nuclear weapons? More importantly, if so, can these countries be trusted? Richard Rhodes, the author of the essay entitled “Living with the bomb,” believes that they can. With cooperation and negotiations Rhodes believes nations can secure the deadly materials from which weapons of mass destruction are made of (Rhodes). He also believes that this will help reduce arsenals which will help eliminate possible future risks (640). The author somehow believes that regardless of the tensions in the Middle East and its surrounding countries, they are worthy of our trust in a matter as great and serious as their development of nuclear weapons. Throughout his essay, Rhodes cites several cases throughout history where there have been direct threats due to the fact that certain countries simply cannot be trusted. Nuclear weapons are an extremely big deal in our world today, especially when it comes to terrorism. The idea of relying only on cooperation to secure the materials required to build nuclear weapons is outrageous, and the only program that would eliminate all threats would be by disarming all countries of their nuclear programs.
Barbie’s not going anywhere, and chances are, she will be sitting on the next generation’s bedroom shelf, wearing the latest clothing, and still displaying her bright smile. It is up to our generation, as mothers and fathers, to teach our baby girls who Barbie really is. It is important they not only love Barbie for her unattainable beauty, but for her strong feminity.
Stone, Tanya Lee. The Good, the Bad, and the Barbie: A Doll's History and Her Impact on Us. New York: Penguin Group, 2010. Print.
Heppermann, C. M. (2010). The Good, the Bad, and the Barbie: A Doll's History and Her Impact on Us. Horn Book Magazine, 86(6), 119-120. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.