Nuclear weapons. Enough said. Okay, I'll elaborate. Could I get some opening credits up in here? Bum ba dum! Ba bum ba dum ba da dum dum ba dum da dum! Ba dum ba dum! (Ba ba dum!)... Ba dum ba dum! (Ba ba dum!)...BA BA BA DUM! (BA DUM BA DUM!!!!!!) A brief HistoryThe granddaddy of all nuclear weapons, the atomic bomb, was first developed by America during WWII, through The Manhattan Project. The first two atomic bombs were dropped over Japan in August 1945, bringing about Japan's unconditional surrender & the end of WWII. Over the next several decades, countries around the world began developing stockpiles of nuclear weapons, most notable America and the Soviet Union (the Cold War! Communists! Red Dawn!). Today's nuclear bombs, thermonuclear weapons, use runaway fission reactions to kick-start a fusion reaction. These weapons are immensely powerful. Here's a link to a page that illustrates the staggering power of these warheads: www.businessinsider.com/this-chart-shows-the-terrifying-power-of-modern-nuclear-bombs-2012-6 Today, Russia, the US, France, China, the UK, Pakistan, India, and Israel all have nuclear weapons. Both North Korea and Iran have been in headlines over issues concerning their nuclear programs. PRos: The Deterrent ArgumentThe Cold War was essentially a race for global supremacy. One of the main reasons for this international standoff was the stockpiling of nuclear weapons, or nuclear proliferation. However, because both America and the Soviets had so many of them, war never broke out. This was due to a theory known as "Mutually Assured Destruction," or M.A.D. The idea was that if either party decided to drop nukes on the other, a nuclear war would begin that would lead to the destruction of both nations and the planet overall. A real "lose-lose" situation, for those conflict-resolution experts out there. Some tenets of this theory still hold true today, with proponents of nuclear proliferation arguing that the stockpiling of nukes leads to international safety overall, because the threat of obliteration deters anyone from conducting a nuclear attack. This leads to more global cooperation and negotiation, instead of war. This certainly has some truth to it. The only two world wars so far occurred within a few decades of each other, but since the development of nukes, we have yet to see a WWIII. As Al Einstein said, "I know not with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones." And that guy knew what's up. COns: Safety FirstThose who believe in nuclear nonproliferation, or the eradication of nuclear weapons, believe that this will lead to a safer world overall. Concerns over human losses, environmental impacts, maintenance costs, and peace in general have been raised. As we know, nuclear weapons are very destructive. Will the destruction of nukes lead an easing of tensions and world peace? I don't know. Probably not. The reality of our earth is that world peace is likely impossible. As long as there are nations, there will be international conflict. Nuclear arsenals help keep everyone a little bit safer because the threat of destruction keeps fingers off the triggers. But hey, what do I know? I'm just your average HS speech student! We're idiots! *note: I do not support the government of North Korea. But don't tell them that. That guy's crazy. Today's totally legit sources:www.icanw.org/the-facts/the-nuclear-age/
www.nbcnews.com/news/world/fact-sheet-who-has-nuclear-weapons-how-many-do-they-n548481 www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/how-do-nuclear-weapons-work#.V_Jwe00rLnA people.howstuffworks.com/mutual-assured-destruction2.htm www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins122873.html greengarageblog.org/7-biggest-pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-weapons www.visionlaunch.com/pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-weapons/
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Logan wSpeech student and world problem solver. Skills include football, writing, and Archives
November 2016
Categories
All
|