top-rated free essay

nuclear weapon

By DanielOng2 Oct 22, 2014 742 Words

IntroduceThough after the second World War some countries have revised their nuclear weapons programme, nuclear weapons still today are considered to be an established currency of politics and security. While the nuclear weapons states have agreed on a legally binding commitment to nuclear disarmament, they continue to rely heavily on such weapons in their security doctrines and continue to invest and modernise their arsenals. The way towards nuclear disarmament has many different paths and there are several approaches. One such approach that is gaining more and more support is the delegitimisation of nuclear weapons. To delegitimise something means to “diminish or destroy the legitimacy, prestige or authority”1/ of a given idea, concept or object. In their advisory opinion in July 1996 the International Court of Justice stated that “the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules humanitarian law”. Since the use of nuclear weapons is generally considered to be illegal, their overall utility is questionable. So in order to delegitimise nuclear weapons, there is a critical need to change the perception of their role and utility: from a position in which they occupied a central strategic place to one in which their role is seen as wholly unnecessary as well as undesirable. To be successful in this task other actors that are not bound to a specific state’s security polices are of utmost importance, they can bring new ideas to the table and keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand. It all comes down to nuclear weapons not being very useful in today’s world and the upholding of these weapons increasing the danger of them being used and thus causing devastation. PointIf we were to abolish all of our nuclear programs it only takes one rouge country like North Korea or Pakistan to launch some at us and eliminate us or any other country. Also once we would disarm them other countries like China and Russia would be watching us closer than ever before. If even 1 is launched at us we are screwed. We need to defend the world.- Why? Just Why? Because it will bring less harm to innocent people? No. If America gets rid of nuclear bombs what would then stop North Korea and Kim-Jong Un from taking over the whole entire world? The answer is nothing. Without nukes in countries such as the U.S. How would we be able to defend the people of our country? Simple - Its very simlpe, its the same as taking away firearms. if you abolish nuclear weapons only the bad guys will have them. and no country in the world could take on the us or russia. its to much money and time to dismantle every nuke in the world. keep them. No matter what we do - , they'll always be around Now that we have the technology for nuclear weapons even if we "abolish them" people will still be able to get their hands o them. Scientists and engineers will be kidnapped and sold to the highest bidder for countries to have nukes, and if we don't have the deterrent of mutually assured destruction then that will cause nuclear war Not a chance! We shouldn't! - We got understand that the world is never going to be a peaceful place. The world is only going to get worse. More wars are going to break out and we have to understand that the worlds going to end soon. God specifically states in the book of revelations that "nation will rise up against nation." So we need to stop dreaming like the world has a chance to be peaceful, because it is not heading that way and never will. We're all in the end times here, it's only a matter of time until the real war breaks out between the world. And that is what God specifically is trying to tell us in the book of revelations. Peace by balance of terror.- Logical thinking capability, not idealism, should come to a conclusion of the deterrence effect of a nuclear arms race is the only way to ensure world peace. If human nature was perfect in all possible aspects than we won't need weapons in the first place. But, since we do have weapons and do have imperfect minds, a physical threat is the only way to thwart the human mind from malfunctioning.

Cite This Document

Related Documents

  • Weapons of Mass Destruction

    ...The term Weapons of Mass Destruction has two indications. In its broader, literal sense, it is used to refer to weapons whose destructive power far surpasses that of guns or conventional explosives. However, the term is more often used in a narrower sense, to refer specifically to nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Since the September 11...

    Read More
  • Why Do Developing Countries Want to Acquire the Nuclear Bomb

    ...cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the nuclear bomb has been developed to be a devastating weapon. Throughout the years many countries have or attempted to acquirer this weapon for different reasons. There are now five countries , China, Russia, Great Britain, United States, and France, who are now officially recognised, by the Non Proliferation ...

    Read More
  • Nuclear Arms Race

    ...a balance of power between countries. The Nuclear Arms Race started because there wasn't a balance of power after World War II. Ronald E. Powaski, March to Armageddon (New York: Oxford University Press: 1989) 5.The United States was the only country, at that time, which possessed nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union feared the United States woul...

    Read More
  • Nuclear Weapons

    ...Nuclear Weapons On August 1954, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the cites of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing over two hundred thousands instantly and more over time due to radiation and other injuries. These two bombs ended World War II and changed the public’s view of nuclear energy. Those bombs were the only nuclear weapons us...

    Read More
  • nuclear war

    ...flooded with messages about the dangers of atomic weapons and attack from foreign powers through pamphlets, household objects, media and film. ( Living under the threat of nuclear war would have been a stressful event in my life. Nuclear war can happen at any given point without warning. It’s like I should be ready an...

    Read More
  • Are Nuclear Weapons Strategically Obsolete?

    ...Are Nuclear Weapons Strategically Obsolete? Why or Why not? The ongoing debate of whether or not nuclear weapons are obsolete or not is a very complex one. Numerous studies have purported that nuclear weapons no longer serve an important strategic purpose for countries such as the United States of America and Great Britain. Clausewitz stated ...

    Read More
  • More Nuclear Weapons Better?

    ...May more nuclear weapons be better? To give an answer on whether more nuclear weapons would be better we need first to define what is meant with more and what we consider to be better. Does more refer to the quantity of weapons or the spread of them to more countries? And more importantly, in what ways is a situation with more nuclear weapons b...

    Read More
  • Paper on Nuclear Weapons

    ...Introduction The role of nuclear weapons in international politics is one of deterrence and conflict. Webster’s dictionary defines a nuclear weapon as an “explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission or a combination of fission and fusion.” The definition uses the words “destr...

    Read More

Discover the Best Free Essays on StudyMode

Conquer writer's block once and for all.

High Quality Essays

Our library contains thousands of carefully selected free research papers and essays.

Popular Topics

No matter the topic you're researching, chances are we have it covered.