Nuclear Disarmament Persuasive Speech

Additionally, it also presents perspectives on important policies and strategies of Iran and North Korea, in regard to the development of their armory of nuclear weapons.

Obama and Biden will always maintain a strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist. But they will take several steps down the long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons. They will stop the development of new nuclear weapons; work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair trigger alert; seek dramatic reductions in U.S. and Russian stockpiles of nuclear weapons and material; and set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is

The United States is currently spending $35 Billion a year; which is 14% of the defense budget, or it is $96 million a day, because of the nuclear efforts of which about $25 million goes for operation and maintenance for the nuclear arsenal. The rest of the money is spent on cleanup, arms control verification, and ballistic missile research, which all of that, just adds to the cost greatly. President Obama revealed a budget that includes more than $220 million in cuts for nuclear security programs in the next fiscal year. One of the largest reductions is going to come to the International Material Protection and Cooperation program, and which it works to secure and eliminate the vulnerable nuclear weapons and materials. President Obama

enemies to scare them into not continuing the battles that they are taking place in. They rhetorically strategized to scare the enemies into thinking that they were not bluffing and would use the weapons if the task presented itself. Bush even said that even if matters did go worse that he still most likely would not have used the nuclear weapons that he possessed. Also the statement made that if a president looks at using nuclear weapons lightly that it should be an embarrassment to them shows that even when they threaten using these weapons they are most likely bluffing. It appears that as time goes by people do not want nuclear weapons around especially our president. He also sees the huge damage that it can cause and is also trying to make it impossible for Iran to obtain these weapons as he is also working on trying to remove our nuclear weapons from Europe and other parts to not have the option of obtaining nuclear weapons in the future. This matter is super important for Americans to know about because nuclear weapons can be very catastrophic if they are used, especially by an enemy to the United States. The questions that need to be asked are is there ever going to be an end to nuclear weapons? Will we ever find the peace and security that Bush talks about? Will there

The third and final proposal is taking greater action on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to confirm all nations are on the same playing field to dismantle nuclear weaponry. I plan on providing updated analysis in these issues as well. The Seventh Decade was written in 2007 and a lot has gone on since then in regards to nuclear activity and I plan on making it clear to the reader where the U.S. and the rest of the world stands.

“This administration has no greater responsibility than the Safety and Security of the American people. And there is no greater threat to the American people than weapons of mass destruction, particularly the danger posed by the pursuit of nuclear weapons by violent extremists and their proliferation to additional states”. (NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY 2010)

Although, the Cold War has been over for decades the threat of imminent nuclear destruction still looms over America; not from terrorist groups such as ISIS or Russia the country with the largest stockpile of nuclear weaponry, but rather, a persistent threat that many Americans do not even perceive as one. North Korea is not shy about demonstrating their nuclear weapons, with the most recent of their tests being fired into the Japanese ocean. Both the articles I’ll be addressing today give a clear statement of how America has addressed nuclear conflict in the past and how Americans still fear the same kinds of attacks without thinking of new ways their country could be compromised by nuclear weaponry.

Abstract: In order for one to rate the progress of the Obama administration, you must begin with an honest view of his entrance into office. The President came into office on the promises of change, and some very lofty ideas. He also came into an office plagued by war and a world wide threat of financial dishevel.

Offers the A to Z on Nuclear Issues. Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, n.d. Web. 2 July 2015.

Imagine if you and all the citizens that live in the United States were completely banned from leaving. Well actually in some places like North Korea this really happens. It wouldn’t be fun stuck in the U.S. your entire life with no vacations and no meeting relatives that might be living outside of America. For me personally I would hate being stuck in the U.S. for life and to top it all off less food and higher taxes! Life would be pretty hard wouldn’t it? WELL OF COURSE IT WOULD! It would be very difficult to feed and clothe your family if there is higher taxes. Being stuck in the United States without being able to visit family from other places would be bad enough in itself, but the government raising taxes and making food a higher price is insane. This has started riots, protests, fighting which results in injuries. If you even attempt to escape the United States, there will be serious consequences such as beatings, jail time, and…..you know what happens. The president doesn’t stop any of this because he especially gets payed loads. What caused all this to happen, you ask? Well fortunately for you I have the answer to that. One peaceful and quiet day everyone was happy, but then out of nowhere there was an explosion. Tons of explosions! The invaders conquered all of America and changed the laws to the point where nobody could ever exit the country. Soon they built a brand new army with a new government, but the same president that decided to join the “bad side” all

It’s 2028 and the two nuclear giants are fighting against each other. Thousands dead, buildings in ashes and many hopes destroyed. Yet the worst is yet to come. The temperature of the world is decreasing to new records and is staying like that for many years to come. This is a nuclear winter that many scientists have predicted for decades. A nuclear weapon uses either uranium or plutonium. They work by using a nuclear reaction which breaks down an atom or nucleus into two pieces. This process produces a significant amount of energy which leads to an explosion. (Chan) A nuclear weapon can also be as big as a refrigerator or as small as a warhead. (Daniel) The first nuclear weapon was made in the 1930s known as the “Manhattan Project” made by the U.S. This project was suspended after Hitler was killed, but the U. S. used the weapon due to Japan attacking Pearl Harbor. This attack put the U. S. in a rage, so the U. S had a plan to use the weapon and another nuclear weapon. The U. S dropped a bomb named “Little Boy” on Hiroshima, which followed with the biggest explosion ever witnessed. Then the U. S dropped another bomb. (Lemouse) This was the first and last time anyone used a nuclear bomb, for now. While several people in the government and regular citizens argue that nuclear weaponry is stopping from giving any threats, but nuclear weaponry is actually causing an environmental turmoil and a radiation that will affect everyone in the vicinity for many ages to come.

(I have talked about early detection, but what if it is too late? What if you are already a victim?)

The Cold War is over and some people believe that we do not need nuclear deterrence anymore. The U.S.S.R has fallen and Russia poses little threat to launch a nuclear attack on the United States. Because of this, Russia and the United States have begun disarming their nuclear weapons. The United States has reduced its nuclear stockpile of warheads from 31,265 in 1965 to about 10,455 in 2002, enough to use for deterrence ("Table of . . . "). This disarming agreement is only between these two countries and they will continue to keep a minimum number of these nuclear warheads to deter other countries. They realize that they are not a threat to each other,

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)

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