The Pros And Cons Of Rethinking A Nuclear Weapon

" A weapon isn't good or bad, depends on the person who uses it." Jet Li

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.

The purposeful bombing of civilians as a wartime strategy has oftentimes been used to bring about the end of a war, but controversy has sparked up about the ethicality of this practice because of its mass destruction of human lives. This tactic goes against human nature’s aversion to intentionally cause harm without a reasonable basis. Is the bombing of innocent people justified if it ultimately brings an end to the war? This ethical question arises when considering the issue of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.

The president is someone who is head over the state and government of the United States. Being the president of the United States means various things that require many decisions being made. A president is in charge of signing the laws/ rules of our country. Sometimes those decisions really improve our country and other times those decisions turnout to be big mistakes. Majority of the time a president is required to act on site with little information. In 1945 while one of our former presidents was in office the biggest decision ever made happened. Only one country in history has ever used an atomic bomb against another nation. While in war with Japan, America had to make the anonymous decision to use the atomic bomb. At the time the atomic

“All is fair in love and war”, but what if the war begins by surprise, and the love is for a country’s ideals? These conundrums and countless others were forced onto America when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1841. Prior to the surprise attack, the Japanese forces, under the command of Emperor Hirohito, viciously began attacking the Chinese provinces in 1937. By 1940, the country had joined the Rome-Berlin Axis, cementing their place as an enemy of the democratic Allies. However, because America wished to remain isolationist, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not attempt to directly stop the efforts of the Axis of Evil. Instead, America decides to cut off oil trade with Japan, which prompts them to make the highly offensive move of attempting to take over the Pacific region between America and

Brian K. Edwards 2/18/15 Dr. Antizzo Contempory Politic Ideologies Examining the Use of the Atomic Bomb Just to provide historical background information on the issue I am about to address I will first set the scene. On the morning of December 7, 1941, hundreds of Japanese fighter planes attacked the American naval base at Pearl

In 1945, August 6th and 9th, a US bomber drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, causing instant deaths and massive destruction.Yet, Despite it ending the war, despite Japan surrender and thousands of lives saved. Was it okay for the US to use such massive amount of deadly power against other humans?

Without the hindsight we have now, the atomic bomb seemed like the only reasonable choice to save American lives and to end the war. Wartime rules are not the same as rules during times of peace, people can make decisions they would rarely make without the duress of battle.

Every American president makes decisions with enormous repercussions for the future. Some of these decisions prove successful; others turn out to be blunders. In virtually every case, presidents must act with contradictory advice and limited information. At 8:15 a.m., August 6, 1945, an American B-29 released an atomic bomb over Hiroshima, Japan. Within minutes, Japan’s eighth largest city was destroyed. By the end of the year, 140,000 people had died from the bomb’s effects. After the bombing was completed, the United States announced that Japan faced a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which had never been seen on this earth." Background: In 1939, Albert Einstein, writing on behalf physicist Leo Szilard and other leading physicists,

If it were Despite America’s foothold, many scientists in other nations were familiar with the entire process. American efforts to veil the Manhattan Project were immense, however, it was only a matter of time before other nations would start mass-producing atomic weapons. As addressed by Stimson (1947), “It is extremely probable that the future will make it possible for atomic bombs to be constructed by smaller nations or even groups, or at least by a larger nation in a much shorter time” (p. 3). Stimson was concerned about the future use of atomic energy, and recognized the global dangers posed in developing the bomb – America could spark the beginning of global annihilation. However, even if America decided to cease development, another country would ultimately produce atomic energy regardless if America continued or not. Stimson also realized, since America was the only nation capable of mastering atomic energy, it was their responsibility the schematic blue prints did not end up in a terroristic nation. The systems to regulate atomic weapons at a global scale would “involve such thoroughgoing rights of inspection and internal controls as we have never heretofore contemplated,” (Stimson, 1947 p. 3) which only strengthened the argument of not developing the atomic bomb. As a result, the consideration of using such a weapon at the expense of condemning a

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

Since the nineteen-forties nuclear weapons have been used to help end, or have caused problems between countries. The dangers of using nuclear weapons have increased over the many years since they were first used. Either way, the fight over nuclear weapons have become more and more common because of the new developments in science and technology. The use of nuclear weapons have been used to threaten many different countries around the world which include the United States and many more. Nuclear weapons have become an overall issue in the world today, yet the issue has been ignored. Just recently this issue has been noticed, yet we still ignore the problems that have happened. As the world of technology has become more educated new nuclear weapons have been created, but they have not been tested or used. The United States should aggressively promote nuclear disarmament because of reprocessing, exaggerations, and waste management.

The consequences that hurt so many were not taken into consideration when the United States dropped the atomic weapons on Japan, during the final stages of World War II. The United States was the first and the only country to ever use an atomic weapon during war. President Harry Truman

Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. One can demolish a whole city, potentially killing millions, and exposed the natural environment and lives of future generations through its long-term catastrophic effects. According to the UNODA- United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2011), “Although nuclear weapons have only been used twice in warfare- in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945-about 22,000 reportedly remains in our world today and there have been over 2,000 nuclear tests conducted to date.” Nuclear weapons have been viewed as a threat to peace by world leaders. There have been debates of whether to let Iran and North Korea acquire nuclear weapons, leaders all around the world along with Liberals believe that it is a threat to peace and should limit the spread whereas neo realist have another belief that nuclear weapon can make the world a peaceful place. Because states would fear to attack each other. For example the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and cold war- there were only threats and war did not happen because of nuclear deterrence. The Cuban missile crisis has frequently been portrayed as the only time where the world stood in the point of nuclear war between the superpowers. This is an example of how nuclear weapons were used to threaten the rival. Another examples would be that of India and Pakistan before they acquire nuclear weapon , they fought three bloody wars after having their independence but since 1998, after acquiring

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