The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Proliferation

694 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay On Nuclear Arms Race

Nuclear proliferation is seen as a growing problem in the United States. Some people think that it is fine to ignore the proliferation while others want the solution that comes with the nonproliferation agreement. There is some debate between whether nuclear proliferation is a negative thing or if nuclear weapons can be used for peace. While nuclear proliferation is a negative thing there is people on the other side of the argument who say nuclear weapons are needed in order to find peace (Good Will Blogging). Nuclear proliferation can be solved by the nonproliferation agreement but there are more than one way to solve a problem. The first thing that helps differentiate these two ideas is learning what proliferation is. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary proliferation or proliferate is rapid production, in other words an increase in something (Merriam-Webster). In this case it is nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Since proliferation is seen as rapid production nonproliferation is seen as stopping the rapid production of …show more content…

According to some scholars continuing nuclear proliferation could eventually have a stabilizing effect on international politics. This was said in a book called “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate by Scott D. Sagan and Kenneth N. Waltz”. One author said that it could eventually stabilize while the other author stated that it would be extremely dangerous to keep up with proliferation because there is a large chance that an accident will occur with a country that could not control the power of a nuclear weapon (Good Will Blogging). In this book both sides of the argument is partially seen. Proliferation is seen as a bad thing and that does have some truth behind it but there are other parts that make this a more elaborate debate of if places should just get rid of nuclear

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb

    1061 Words  | 3 Pages

    On August 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. Three days later, a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. On August 15th, the Japan announced unconditional surrender in World War II. To this day historians still discuss why the U.S. decided to use the atomic bombs. Orthodox historians argue that the decision to drop the bombs was a military one designed purely to defeat the Japanese. Revisionist historians argue that the bombs were not needed to defeat Japan; the bombs were meant to shape the peace by intimidating the Soviets. After analyzing the documents in The Manhattan Project it has become clear that the U.S. used the bombs during WWII not only to defeat the Japanese, but also to intimidate the Soviet Union

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb

    1326 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the most controversial decisions that have been made, in the history of the United States, was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The ever so controversial topic of the dropping of the atomic bombs has successfully driven people insane. People feel strongly that this decision was atrocious and unnecessary, while others believe the polar opposite, that it was completely necessary. Some historians argue that the human cost to the Japanese population can never justify the use of such weapons. Other historians see it from an optimistic perspective, that it would not have been moral if atomic weapons had not been used to end the war as quickly as possible. President Harry S.

    Read More

  • More Will Be Worse Scott Sagan Summary

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Christians' Justifications of Using Nuclear Weapons

    549 Words  | 2 Pages

    We are told, "To love thy neighbour" and "To treat." our enemies, as we would want to be treated. " If you were to look at these commandments you would see that nuclear warfare could never be justified, and if you do provoke a nuclear war, you should be punished. That brings me into the second reason why countries retain nuclear weapons and that is a threat. It is a way of protecting your country, but you will protect yourself and retaliate if provoked.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bombs

    805 Words  | 2 Pages

    The gravity of the atomic bombings was not taken lightly by the nations surrounding Japan, but the United States refused to lose any more men in a long-winded assault; the enemy 's resolve was unmatched by American standards. Majerus states, "This firm resolution of the Imperial Army to fight out an all-or-nothing battle until virtually the very last man ultimately did not go unnoticed by US government officials." (5). Further proofs of these arguments were demonstrated by the Japanese when they deployed the kamikaze (suicide pilots) to Pearl Harbor. The raising question is, however, did decisional certainty regard any ulterior motive at the time considered to prevent the death of American troops, or had there been any considered possibilities within a peaceful resolution? This has sparked another theory among the nation 's scholars. Did the U.S. drop the bombs to save American lives, or to intimidate their rivaling ally, the Soviet Union? It was later revealed that the USSR was willing to help the United States in the assault of Japan. History teacher Brent Dyck states, "At the Potsdam Conference held in July 1945, Stalin told Truman that the Soviet Union was ready to help the United States and invade Japan on August 15."

    Read More

  • Atomic Bomb: America's Instrument of Unconditional Surrender

    1229 Words  | 3 Pages

    The fact that the United States resolved to drop an atomic bomb over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan shocked many people, including U.S. citizens. The U.S. chose a brutal weapon when choosing the atomic bomb, as proven by the thousands of deaths it caused. Today, some people still question the motives for such a ruthless choice of weaponry. The atomic bomb, however destructive and questionable, seemed to be the only way to ensure “unconditional surrender” of the Japanese. The atomic bomb was, in fact, “a clear step designated to force Japan’s unconditional surrender;” however, this statement fails to give attention to the larger picture that influenced the U.S.’s decision to use the atomic bomb. By using the atomic bomb before any other nation

    Read More

  • Compare Nuclear Fusion vs. Nuclear Fission

    667 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nuclear energy must be a consideration for the future with the rapidly depleting supply of fossil fuels. This type of energy can be created through nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Nuclear fission is the splitting of a heavy atom into two or more parts, releasing huge amounts of energy. The release of energy can be controlled and captured for generating electricity. Nuclear fusion involves bombarding hydrogen atoms together to form helium. In the long run, nuclear fusion has greater potential than fission.

    Read More

  • Cold Peace Essay

    1142 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...he international economic and political order. A study also suggest the liberal hegemon of US intention to use soft power to spread liberal ideas around the world would only give a negative impact on international stability rather than bringing peace it caused violence in certain states such as Iran, Iraq and North Korea (Jehangir, 2012). Other than that, the concept of nuclear peace had been criticised as it may causes the rise of terrorist organisation; thus, weaken the initial realist’s theory of conventional deterrence and nuclear peace. The introduction of nuclear weapons as promoting peace led to the emergence of terrorists groups and developed an unstable side in the post-cold war. This would result to aggressive state behaviour due to lack of trust and developed great suspicions between nuclear states and fear of high risk of accidental nuclear war.

    Read More

  • The Manhattan Project: The Brain Child Of The Manhattan Project

    1466 Words  | 3 Pages

    Nuclear Arms, as opposed to conventional arms, generate their destructive force from nuclear reactions. The issues that are related to the use of nuclear weapons is also far different than the issues generated by conventional bombs. The long term

    Read More

  • This House would Abolish Nuclear Weapons

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    Have you ever thought of nuclear weapons being a threat to you? If you have never taken this into consideration; think again. Yet some people believe nuclear weapons should not be abolished and therefore every country should own them. Points that support this side of the argument are; nuclear weapons are required for deterrence, thus abolishment is an unrealistic goal and that abolishment would be counter productive and only lead to greater barbarity in warfare. I understand these points, but I do not take this side of the argument as these reasons are not enough to convince me to keep nuclear weapons.

    Read More

  • DBQ part 2

    544 Words  | 2 Pages

    In today’s society many countries and even citizens of the United States question the U.S. government’s decision to get in involved in nuclear warfare. These people deemed it unnecessary and state that the U.S. is a hypocrite that preaches peace, but causes destruction and death. Before and during World War II the U.S. was presented with a difficult decision on whether or not to develop and use the atomic bomb.

    Read More

  • A Cruelty Beyond Comprehension: The Bombing of Hiroshima

    1815 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the late summer of 1945 the decision was made to vaporize over 70,000 Japanese civilians with a single nuclear payload dropped on a city possessing virtually no strategic value. It is estimated over 100,000 more civilians died as a direct result of this bombing in the years that followed. The rationalizations and excuses made to justify the act are myriad. Some say that it saved lives, that it shortened the war. Others say it was justified revenge for the Japanese attack on the naval base at Pearl Harbor. The truth is that the United States felt a need to showcase its nuclear dominance to the world. There will never be a legitimate justification for this bombing, which to this day remains the most destructive singular act carried out by human beings against other human beings. The most evil invention in history is nuclear weaponry, a shockingly destructive force that has the capacity to level an entire city, and reduce its population to ash and bone. Nuclear warfare has not taken place since the last days of World War II, yet this is not for lack of nuclear capabilities. In the decades following there has been a proliferation of nuclear capability despite the knowledge that if one nuclear device were to be used, the consequences and implications would be likely irreparable. Nuclear war has the potential for extinction of the human race, yet no genuine attempts at moving towards a complete nuclear disarmament are being made. The amount of nations with nuclear capabilities is unconscionable; yet the number will only increase with the greatest of these nations unwilling to consider a complete nuclear disarmament. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

    Read More

  • War: Nuclear Power

    1074 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Cold War was a time of great tension all over the world. From 1945 to 1989, the United States was the leader and nuclear power and was competing with the Soviet Union to create huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons. However, even though the Cold War ended, nuclear weapons are still a threat. Countries around the world strive to create nuclear power, and they do not promise to use it for peaceful purposes. Some examples of the struggles caused by nuclear weapons include the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Iran’s recent nuclear weapon program. Surely, nuclear weapons have created conflict all over the world since the Cold War era.

    Read More

  • Knowledge Gained from Destruction

    1556 Words  | 4 Pages

    Nuclear energy has is an overall success and continues to be because it is a reliable, efficient energy source that produces minimal pollution. Although it is a efficient energy source, it is also a massive destructive force that has been used in the past and can be used in the future if not properly defended against. America today can learn from instances in the 20th century such as the atomic bomb drops, exploration of fusion reactions, the knowledge gained from the three mile island accident, and from espionage. Nuclear technology is basically that manipulation of atoms in their current state. Usually radioactive elements such as high-grade plutonium or uranium are used in order to create a massive radioactive reaction that have the potential to obliterate any object in its way leaving a lasting negative effect on the environment. Nuclear energy was mainly researched for the atomic bomb droppings that occurred in 1945 as a result of Japanese oppression during World War II. The science of atomic manipulation, atomic radiation, nuclear fission and nuclear fusion was first developed in 1895. Research began to significantly speed up when the government took a large interest in the destructive force that nuclear weapons had the potential to hold. The only reason that the world ever had the experience of nuclear energy was because of World War II and oppression. Nuclear Energy came with a price of thousands of lives, that were not rightfully taken, but without those lives lost, our world would be different today, and we continue to learn from the mistakes and from the successes that we have had with nuclear technology.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Weapons

    1262 Words  | 3 Pages

    All over the world, every nation and country have nuclear weapons at hand. Nuclear weapons help protect those countries and nations, they provide global defense. If nuclear weapons were to be outlawed and were no longer able to use then it would decrease the amount of jobs in the nuclear field. Although these weapons of mass destruction can be extremely dangerous and cause harm for billions of people; nuclear weapons provide jobs for many people across the nation. Not only does banning nuclear weapons take away the amount of occupations, but it goes against the right to bear arms. The second

    Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Proliferation

Open Document