Pros And Cons Of The Electron Bomb

The first test of a Hydrogen bomb also known as a fusion bomb immediately vaporized the island it was tested on and left a mile wide crater. A Hydrogen fusion bomb is an atomic bomb made from nuclear isotopes of trinitan and deuterium. A neutron is fired at a nuclei and adds to the weight of the bomb causing a chain reaction of explosion. The effects of a Hydrogen bomb are extensive. History shows this because when the first hydrogen bomb was tested it vaporized the island immediately and left nothing but a crater. Like all nuclear bombs the hydrogen bomb leads to nuclear fallout. The H bomb has never been used in warfare but has been used for many tests. Hydrogen bombs or any fusion bomb should be banned in warfare because the nuclear fallout is damaging to human organs and we are exposed to fallout all the time, in addition the power and force of this bomb is to grave

What if the world we lived in was no longer safe? The decision for the hydrogen brings in the possibility for safety to cease to exist at every corner of the world. Although there are many reasons why someone would say the hydrogen bomb should be created, it should not be. If created it would be able to cause even more mass destruction to civilization than the atomic bomb is, have unpredictable effects, and would change the nature of foreign policy.

the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan during World War II, yet the controversy about the validity of this decision continues in scientific, political and general public circles. Most likely, due to the complexity of the issue and never knowing the outcome if the bombs were not dropped, it will remain unresolved. A lesson that is continually learned in the U.S.-once again in present times-is the importance of acting from facts and not from emotion. It is hoped that all pros and cons are very seriously weighed before any action is taken if and when such a serious decision must be made in the future.

Whether the use of the atomic bomb on Japan during World War II was justified, we will never know. However, the amount of time spent on discussing the use and effect of the bomb seems to be nonexistent. If they talked about the bomb there was no major argument against using the bomb; with that came mystery because they did not understand the bomb. There were factors that they used as an excuse to use the bomb, but these were in the background and later added to make the argument seem more one-sided, in their favor. Whether the use of the atomic bomb proved helpful or not is up to debate. The atomic bomb changed the world, and given the evidence, the use of the bomb was not talked about in detail except for when and where to use it.

In August of 1945, two nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan, consequently, killing tens of thousands of civilians due to radiation, burns, or turning them immediately into ash. The monstrous bomb sneaks up on innocent civilians and rips their life from them in one foul swoop. The Atomic bomb kills masses of people at one time, but can also save masses of people’s lives from the ongoing war. Herein lies the conflict, since the nuclear bomb is extremely lethal, but effective, should it be used in war? Do you believe that this act was ethical? The atomic bomb should have never been used in past wars and should never be used today because its deadly side effects.

“The city was hidden by that awful cloud . . . boiling up, mushrooming, terrible and incredibly tall," said Colonel Paul Tibbets, pilot of the modified B-29 bomber that dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. The bombings resulted in the death of thousands, including not only Japanese citizens, forces, and military but also American captive soldiers. In the midst of World War II the United States forced Japan to surrender by dropping bombs in the major cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They released the second atomic bomb shortly after, in Nagasaki, Japan.

On August 6th, 1945, the first atomic bomb to ever be used in the history of the world was dropped on Hiroshima. The result of this bomb killed roughly 80,000 people from the blast itself, and tens of thousands more due to radiation poisoning. After a few days passed, the United States dropped another nuclear bomb on Nagasaki, and threatened to drop another if the Japanese did not surrender. The bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki lead to the Japanese surrender to the United States, removing them from the war. While the use of this bomb was likely necessary at the time, was it an ethical decision? The lives that were affected from this blast were not just of those who experienced it, generations later, people who weren’t even alive at the time were faced with trauma as well. With that being said, the dropping of the bomb might have been necessary, but it was an unethical decision, even though the Japanese made it perfectly clear that they will fight until the last civilian.

The year was 1945. World War II was nearly over. Germany had been defeated and the allied forces were sure to win the war. The only unsure thing was how many lives would be lost in defeating Japan. The United States decided to drop the atomic bomb on August 6, 1945. On that day the Enola Gay dropped "Little Boy" on Hiroshima. Three days later the United States dropped "Fat Boy" on Nagasaki. 240,000 civilians, mostly women and children, lost their lives on these two days. On August 14, 1945 Japan surrendered unconditionally. Was it necessary?

People always wonder if the United States decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan were the right choice. Even though the bombs killed and injured many people, Japanese civilians and Japanese soldiers. The decision to drop the bombs on Japan was the right thing to do at that time.

On August 6, 1945 the United States deployed the first atomic bomb over Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Once the United States dropped the atomic bomb there has been a lot of comments whether or not it was the right move to do. I believe that it was justified for the United States to drop the atomic bomb on Japan however, it did have some cons to it. The reason behind dropping the first atomic bomb was to stop the war. Although it roughly killed around 60,00 people in Hiroshima and 35,000 in Nagasaki. If they didn’t drop that bomb the war could have claimed more lives than the atomic bomb dropping.

On August 6, 1945, the 33rd president of the United States, Harry S. Truman, made the executive decision to drop a 10,000 pound atomic bomb named “Little Boy” on the city of Hiroshima in Japan. Three days later, Truman ordered another atomic bomb, called “Fat Man” to be dropped on another Japanese city, Nagasaki. Each bomb had a blast radius of fifty miles. The decision to utilize these weapons of mass destruction will always be a very controversial topic because of the debated morality of the decision.

In August 1945 president Harry Truman dropped the first atomic bomb on Japan. There are many sides in which people have taken that either support or go against this decision. If I were Harry Truman and I was given the decision on whether the atomic bomb should be dropped I would NOT have dropped the bomb on Japan. This decision I have made comes from a Christian view point. While reading the letter sent from Samuel McCrea Cravert to Harry S. Truman I developed the opinion that America was attempting to fight fire with fire.

I believe anything that deals with people’s religion, the creation of new bombs and weapons/banning of weapons, or relating to a serious cause between foreign states should be conducted in secret because it can cause a massive contempt for everyone. Although a majority of people could be Atheist, a vast amount of other people have a religion that is important for their everyday use. Even though banning of religion does not happen within the United States often, there could be a slight chance that it could happen in the future. Different countries do not tolerate the free practice of religion; therefore, if this were to happen here, then millions of people will disagree. The creation of new bombs makes people think that war is about to happen,

An atomic bomb is a bomb whose violent explosive power is due to the sudden release of energy resulting from the splitting of nuclei of a heavy chemical element (as plutonium or uranium) by neutrons in a very rapid chain reaction —called also atom bomb. 2 : a nuclear weapon (as a hydrogen bomb)

Instead, from its onset, Islam spread as a conquering power and remained that way for some time. Explaining it this way, the reader gets a sense of the psychology behind Islam and why, besides being a religious task, spreading Islam is such a goal. By showing the issues Islam faces today in the context of past Islamic traditions, Lewis paints a much clearer picture of the skewed view today’s radicals have and the way they use history to manipulate. He examines influential Muslim voices like Saddam Hussein and Usama Bin Laden, who have used history to give Islam victim status or to claim the continuance of a predecessor’s mission to not only justify terrorist activities, but also to recruit followers. He tells the history of Bin Laden’s statement referring to the “humiliation and disgrace” Islam supposedly has suffered. What Bin Laden was referring to was the defeat of the Ottoman sultanate in 1918 and the imperial presence of Westerners on sacred Muslim lands. Lewis explains the offense many Muslims take to the desecration of their holy lands by foreigners. He describes how the discovery and exploitation of oil in the Holy Land of the Hijaz has exacerbated the growing resentment many Muslims