H23Y 74 English Assignment (National 4)
Added Value Unit
Nuclear Weapons
Recently in the news there have been numerous articles that are expressing the concern over North Korea's and Iran's nuclear weapon plans and programs. Nuclear weapons should not be used against terrorists or any other nation. The reason I chose the topic nuclear weapons is because Nuclear weapons will shape people's futures everywhere and they will be shaped by the decisions. I will be looking at two articles that talk about Nuclear weapons, one from http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/ and another from www.tsarbomba.org. Both articles are trying to inform the audience and I will evaluate how well they achieve this goal.
The first text: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/
July 16, 1939 began as a rather ordinary day for Einstein. Two former students, now colleagues came to visit. Through this visit Einstein learned that nuclear fission was not simply theoretically possible, but a reality. He immediately recognized the repercussions; both good and evil. He realized that if he did nothing, Germany (Hitler) would be able not only to build an atomic bomb, but also to monopolize all known all sources of the precursor materials. Thus, to do nothing, would be to aid the Nazis. To write a letter, use his influence, to make sure the United States would have access to uranium (from Belgium), he was encouraging the development of a device whose sole purpose would be a weapon more devastating than any other ever imagined.
There have only been two instances in world history of nuclear weapons being used against another nation during a military conflict. In both instances the bombs were dropped by U.S. forces on Japanese soil during WWII in hopes that it would generate fear within the Japanese people, and finally break the government into submission. Since the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, no other nation has employed the use a nuclear weapon against another country, so why is it that the United States still possesses a stockpile of nearly 5,000 nuclear warheads if they are not being utilized? The United States has long held the strategy of deterrence, meaning that the purpose of the U.S. arsenal is intended to deter other states from attacking with their own arsenal of nuclear weapons. However, in 2008 with the election of Barack Obama, the United States’ has been taking steps towards reducing its nuclear arsenal and declaring to end developments on new warheads.
The first use of nuclear weaponry in warfare occurred on the morning of August 6, 1945 when the United States dropped the atomic bomb known as “Little Boy” on Hiroshima, Japan. The result was devastating, demonstrating the true power of nuclear warfare. Since the incident, the world has been left fearing the possible calamity of another nuclear war. Joseph Siracusa’s Nuclear Weapons: A Very Short Introduction explains aspects of nuclear weaponry from simply what a nuclear weapon is, to the growing fear from nuclear warfare advancements in an age of terrorism. The book furthered my education on nuclear weapons and the effect they place on society, physically and mentally.
The nuclear bomb has been a weapon in the United States arsenal since the end of world war two, where the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From that day on the way wars were fought has changed forever. Soon after the bomb droppings on the two Japanese cities a race began between the United States and the Soviet Union named the cold war. The two major powers of the world at that time would threaten each other with nuclear war. The cold war ended because the Soviet Union could no longer economically support communism. Then latter on the United States invaded Iran under suspicion that they had nuclear weapons. Years later may people have wondered in nuclear weapons are necessity. Is it really beneficial to whatever nation that possess it, or is it a disaster just waiting to happen? Debates continue to this day on whether nuclear weapons should be against the Geneva Convention. Does the possibility of a nuclear winter with the annihilation of all mankind outweigh the reason for keeping them for protection and military dominance?
Nuclear Weapons have persisted to be the decisive deterrent to any assailant, and the best means of establishing peace. There are many different views on nuclear weapons, even though they cost an extravagate amount of money; they come with positive aspects’. In fact nuclear weapons are one of the greatest reasons that nations do not want to go to war, but alternately, strive to inquire clarification through negotiations. First and foremost, it is very important to analyze just how nuclear weapons prevent war.
Two main theorists of international relations, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan have been debating on the issue of nuclear weapons and the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the 21st century. In their book The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, they both discuss their various theories, assumptions and beliefs on nuclear proliferation and nuclear weapons. To examine why states would want to attain/develop a nuclear weapon and if increasing nuclear states is a good or bad thing. In my paper, I will discuss both of their theories and use a case study to illustrate which theory I agree with and then come up with possible solutions of preventing a nuclear war from occurring.
I think the final reason I found this essay so compelling was its relevance in today’s world. The topic of nuclear war is as prominent as ever in our society, yet to any of us who weren’t alive during the second world war to see the only instances of this weapon ever used, it seems so foreign. And to see such a passionate, rational, and objective view
Topic: Nuclear weapons in the 1940’s to 1990’sThesis: How have nuclear weapons changed over timeNuclear weapons have changed so much since the first nuclear bomb test launch in 19451 that was when it all began they have changed a lot in the short time they dropped the first on hiroshima that one killed more than 140,000 thousand people. More people died later from radiation related illnesses. Three days later another bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and 74,000 people died in that explosion and at the time cost the US 2 billion dollars just to make one of the bombs and the tested a couple of them too.1 http://www.atomicarchive.com/Timeline/Time1950.shtml
I have many reasons on why the United States of America should maintain Nuclear Weapons. Out of these many reason there will be three for this paper. The world is in grave danger by Nuclear Weapons, so it needs to be explained what could happen and more.
Nuclear bombs are fatal weapons engendering explosions that produce fireballs, shockwaves, and intense radiation and later causing a mushroom cloud to form. The mushroom cloud forms from vaporized debris and disperses that fall on earth causing environmental damage. As stated in the article published by Encyclopedia Britannica and written by Thomas B. Cochran, a consultant to the Natural Resources Defense Council, “In the explosion in Hiroshima...convection currents created by the explosion drew dust and other debris into the air, creating the mushroom-shaped cloud...radioactive debris was carried by winds high into the atmosphere, later to settle to Earth as radioactive fallout” (Cochran, 2016, p. 1). The detonation of nuclear bombs instills
Nuclear weapons are one of, if not the most dangerous weapons in the world today and they are one of the biggest issues the world faces at this current moment. They have the capability of destroying entire cities and then some that could result in millions of deaths within seconds. Radiation from the blasts would kill even more people throughout years to come. They were first used in 1945 at the end of World War II, when the United States dropped Little Boy and Fat Man in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to ‘save’ the lives of American soldiers. Since then, a nuclear arms race was born and it’s becoming more of a concern as time moves forward. Albert Einstein, who was the creator of the nuclear bomb once said “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” Countries should not have access to nuclear weapons because it destroys the environment, there is a possibility of a nuclear war that will end in mass destruction of the world, and countries could save both revenue and resources.
Leaders around the world are trying to get rid of their nuclear weapons. In contrast, in a world where Nuclear weapons exist there is no stopping them from being used. When it is used it will have a devastating impact on the world, humans, animals, and plants
Before watching the movie, I was expecting ninety minutes of boredom, a movie that didn't follow the storyline of the novel. But based on the spectacular anecdote written by George Orwell, thanks to the director John Stephenson and Producer Greg Smith, the satire Animal Farm becomes a movie . Like the book, the movie is a drama/ action film. It focuses on a farm, - Manor Farm- which is run by an alcoholic farmer known as the character Jones.
One of the foremost growing concerns in the modern globalized world is the increasing rate of nuclear proliferation. Coupled with the burgeoning number of nuclear devices is the threat of a terrorist possibly obtaining a weapon of such magnitude. While one could argue that the rising number of states with nuclear capability is a disturbing prospect, particularly as many pursue such capabilities without the approval of the “traditional” nuclear powers, terrorists in possession of nuclear arms presents the most horrific outlook concerning nuclear proliferation. Terrorist groups, unlike states, are not organized governmental bodies, which complicates any means of formalized diplomacy or negotiation. Furthermore, unlike as compared to a
In the article, “No Nukes,” Steve Coll, the author, talks of the problem that is worldwide affecting the existence of nuclear affairs, the controversy of the problem, and the downfall of the Global Nuclear-Nonproliferation Regime. With the discussion presented in the article on nuclear affairs, Coll clearly solidifies his position on the subject of the abolition of nukes and makes powerful, argumentative cases, backed up with opinions and facts, for his point of view. Through the citing of the well known figures, in the form of ethos, factual evidence that focuses on foreign affairs and danger, and strong use of words that show strong emotion, Steve Coll constructs a respective, persuasive article in hopes to change some of the audience's views on nukes.