Essay On Nuclear Arsenal

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.

Overall, this could explain the reason why our Congress is so often inefficient because this ability to prevent voting and blocks is taken advantage off a bit too

Congress is perhaps the most despised branch in our government. It is widely considered broken and outdated, and many believe it ignores the wants of the American people. In this paper, I will discuss Congress in depth and shed light on this controversial branch.

It has been just over seven decades since the destructive atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. These bombs were the first of its kind-weapons of mass destruction. There are many points-of-view or opinions about whether or not the bombs should have been used. As always there are two sides to each story; those who are for a cause and those who are against. In this paper, I will discuss the two opposing points-of-view, as well as my own opinion on which argument I find most compelling.

The United State’s legislative branch is primarily guided by Congress, which itself is composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Both of these lawmaking bodies have members elected from the American population, but the sheer number of congressmen and congresswomen that serve each session greatly diminishes the actual power of any single member. In fact, in many cases, members question if they have any power. Furthermore, even if representatives and senators do have a significant say in the legislation process, they often choose not to use it, or to misuse it in ways discordant with democracy. In reality and in our simulation, the way in which Congress members use their power is predominantly influenced by their

August 6, 1945. The day the world and warfare were changed forever. After the first nuclear warhead was dropped, humanity was, and will forever be on the brink of destruction. A single press of a button could end humanity as we know it, bringing total chaos and destruction to the earth. Nuclear weapons are considered to show the power of a country, have nearly been set off due to a false alarm, nuclear weapons are vulnerable to cyberterrorism, and if set off will surely bring an end to the world as we know it.

One of the major things different about our mock congress is that there is no party divide. No one mentioned wether they were a Republican or a Democrat in our debates because it didn't matter. Although, sometimes you could guess from the bill people were trying to pass or the way they were arguing their point but not one cared to actually ask. Another difference is that there is no Staff System supporting you and empowering your bill. A staff system would research every detail making sure that ,whatever the bill is, that it is detailed and precise where as we only have however much research we can find on the internet and possibly the library. Also there was no preventing a bill from passing in our little congress like a filibuster or

As you can see from these examples though this problem is not just unique to Congress. It can also be seen in the "state legislatures of the colonial era, and in the British House of Commons of the sixteenth and twentieth centuries"

The North Korean government continues to financially fund the research and testing of nuclear and ballistic missiles. Little information is known about the North Korean nuclear program and has been made available to foreign nations due to the secrecy and isolation of international affairs. The threat of a nuclear strike from North Korea has become an increasingly serious matter for many nations including the U.S. and its Asian allies, Japan and South Korea. Currently, there are only nine nations known by intelligent analysis that possesses the resources to manufacture nuclear weapons which do include the U.S. However, North Korea is the only nation in the 21st century to conduct a nuclear missile test that has been reported by North Korean

August 6th, 1945, 70,0000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue whether or not the U.S. should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? To answer that first we must look at was going on in the world at the time of the conflict. The U.S. had been fighting a massive war since 1941. Moral was most likely low, and resources were at the same level as moral. Still both sides continued to fight and both were determined to win. Obviously the best thing that could have possibly happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end with a minimum of allied casualties. Harry Truman’s decision to

In 1945, a great technological innovation was dropped over Japan, the atomic bomb. Ever since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world has faced the threat of nuclear attack. In reaction to this, world governments have been forced to find a defense against nuclear attack. One solution to the danger of nuclear attack is the use of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear deterrence is the possession and launching of nuclear weapons for the sole purpose of defense and retaliation against a nuclear attack from another country. Nuclear deterrence is the best answer to the danger of nuclear war, resulting in world security and the prevention of nuclear war. However, some people believe

The previously accepted nature of war stemmed from the Clausewitzian trinity: war is emotional, an experience wrought with passion, violence, and enmity; uncertainty, chance, and friction pervade the medium of war; however, because war is not an end in itself, and because, as a means, it is subordinate to its political aims, war must be subject to reason (Clausewitz, 89). With the first employment of nuclear weapons, however, strategists and military theorists began to question Clausewitz’s foundational ideas (Winkler, 58). Similarly, Allan Winkler, in agreeing with Bernard Brodie’s thesis, opines that the advent of nuclear weapons fundamentally changed the nature of war. Winkler’s assertion stems from his argument that such a nuclear duel would yield a post-war environment incapable of recovery for any parties involved (62). He further describes Brodie’s realization that “[t]he atomic bomb is not just another and more destructive weapon to be added to an already long list. It is something which threatens to make the rest of the list relatively unimportant.” (62) Ultimately, Winkler abridges Brodie’s assessment in stating that “the United States was caught in the paradox of having to prepare for a war it did not plan to fight.” (63)

The Islamic Republic of Iran’s conquest for nuclear energy technology commenced during the 1950’s, inspired by U.S President Dwight Eisenhower’s program called “Atoms for Peace”. This program fabricated a plan in which the U.S Atomic Energy Commission would lend Iran as much as 13.2 pounds of low-enriched uranium in order to further develop their nuclear industries, including health care and medicine.i Two years following the agreement, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi established the Tehran Nuclear Research Center at the Tehran University, and the United States to arranged to supply a five-megawatt reactor. Several years later, in July of 1968, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

The existence of nuclear weapons for better or worse have indubitably impacted our lives in one way or the other. There are the some who find these weapons to be singularly beneficial. For example Defence Analyst Edward Luttwak said “we have lived since 1945 without another world war precisely because rational minds…extracted a durable peace from the very terror of nuclear weapons.” (Luttwak, 1983). Moreover, Robert Art and Kenneth Waltz both extrapolate that “the probability of war between American and Russia or between NATO and the Warsaw Pact is practically nil precisely because the military planning and deployments of each,

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