Wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.” Nuclear weapons (along with chemical and biological weapons) are called Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Unlike conventional bombing – tactical bombing of weapon production factories in order to cripple the enemy – a nuclear weapon wipes out everything in its devastating path. So should all nuclear weapons be destroyed? Ethically speaking, absolutely. Nuclear weapons should
They have become a part of the world and become an involuntary fragment. The use of WMDs over the decade has even shifted from security to purely destruction. Most terrorist groups use WMDs as they possess political goals and have traditional, ethnic, nationalist, or ideological associations which make it necessary for them to use such weapons solely for the sake of destruction. These terrorist groups want to gain politically from their attacks and create terror in the minds of the people which may even not require the use of WMDs in certain cases like the WTC attack. These attacks just aggravate with the use of WMDs.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was the height of the Cold War since there was so much tension between the two superpowers, and both sides had deadly nuclear weapons which could have led to war. During this time, war seemed inevitable to the citizens such as Dino Brugioni. Brugioni “made arrangements for his young family to get out of Washington in the event of war” and stated "’I had seen atomic blasts and I knew the destruction they had left, and I felt sure that Washington would be a target’" (Fidgen 2012). Brugioni is one of many US citizens who believed that nuclear war would be inevitable after the discovery of the Soviet missiles in Cuba, which shows the widespread fear of nuclear war during this time. The nuclear weapons were “an explicit threat to the peace and security of all the Americans” and war was only avoided because of the agreement that Khrushchev and Kennedy had come upon (Cantelon).
In contrast with both these types of terrorism is the Postmodern terrorism. In this, the aim of the activity is to alter the very reality of the conflict. This is done through the use of CBRN (i.e. chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons) to inflict far-reaching and unimaginable damage to the very core of the enemy. Another
Often Soviets had spies that were in pursuit of the American technology, blueprints, and set up of their Atomic cities, “It appears, in other words, that Beria [The Soviets] wanted the American way.” Soviets were very aware of the American atomic project and had an extensive spy ring that penetrated the ring of information, despite the American efforts to keep the project top secret. Though the cold war, by common belief, had technically not began yet, the tension between the two countries had already begun in the race to create the first atomic weapon. As said by Kate Brown, “Intelligence on the American bomb hurtled Soviet and American leaders towards postwar rivalries on the cusp of their joint victory.” This was a period of time that was largely focused on the relationship that the United States had with Germany and Japan in the Second World War, not one focused on the bubbling relationship with the Soviets. Though this early rivalry could easily be marked as the beginning of the high tensions and the race towards the atomic bomb becoming an identifying marker of the Cold War. The interactions and the competition to be the first country with an atomic weapon is what drove the United States success, which is often attributed to the sole intelligence of the
According to a Stanford University research survey, fear can be based off of an idea of preventative war. The idea behind preventative war is to take out a country before they grow any bigger for concern of an overthrow or future war with said country. The survey’s report also discusses other types of preventative war such as: “when one country has a current arms advantage and worries that the other will catch up in the future and that the future situation will be unstable… and so wishes to attack while the balance is in their favor.” Each of these preventative war tactics are based on feelings of fear and anxiety for the future of a nation. Some great examples of preventative war, or times when preventative war was strongly considered are the cold war, when America had access to nuclear weapons, while the Soviets did not, and going way back, The Second Peloponnesian War of 431–404 b.c.e., between the Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta, in which the Spartans began the war with a now or never tactic before the Athens became unbeatable. Jealousy and fright of other countries or nations is undoubtedly a prevailing reason for many wars and wars to
The art of fear is essential in nuclear deterrence. Using the film Dr. Strangelove (Stanley Kubrick, 1964) I will argue that nuclear deterrence is hard to achieve when communication of nuclear capabilities is not well established amongst states. In this paper, I will use the film Dr. Strangelove (1964) to argue how theories such as deterrence theory, realist theory, security dilemma, preventative war, pre-emptive war as well as relative gains and zero sum game led to a failure to achieve nuclear deterrence between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. To make my argument on how more nuclear weapons may hinder deterrence, this essay will proceed as follows; I will firstly discuss the how nuclear deterrence and mutually
Massive Retaliation is the threat of using nuclear weapons against the Soviets if they tried to seize a country not occupied by them and/or tried to expand there country by force. While Brinkmanship was the threat of using nuclear weapons to get an opposing country to back down/consed, Eisenhower used these effectively in the Korean war but there were saw as too dangerous.He used these to easily dispose of the Korean threat by threatening the use of nukes, and all the while, kept communism from spreading into Korea.
PSA “Breaking news today on May 2, 2020 the war on terror has escalated further. The United States has declared war against the terrorist group, ISIS. Now since ISIS controls most of the middle east many people are calling this World War III. President Donald Trump has announced that there are shelters for civilians during nuclear strike. Calm down, the president has ensured that the shelters are guaranteed to be safe and the likelihood of a nuclear strike is slim.
“The full application of our military power, backed by our resolve, will mean the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forces and just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland. (“The Potsdam Proclamation”)" However, Japan would not surrender, because surrendering would be a disgrace. They feared that their emperor would be executed if they surrendered. The U.S. used the atomic bomb to save American and Japanese lives in the long run(Priano). So, at the end of WWII, the U.S. put Japan under international control.
History is all about inspiring speeches, gruesome wars, and unexpected events that decide the course of the future. The Cold War is not an example of a war, but a highly important event, considering there was no actual fighting. The Cold War started because the Soviet 's wanted to spread communism, but America was getting in their way to stop it. Three major factors also contributed to the conflict of war, the most obvious one being the U.S. wanted to stop communism, another being both the Soviet Union and the United States were afraid of each other, and finally competition, because everyone needs some good competition. These factors are both reasons why the war started, and "weapons" that were used.
Blake Mcmahon and Adam Lowther look back to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, describe the destruction the bombing had caused, and acknowledge people’s concern regarding the danger of nuclear weapons. They counter the assumption of nuclear danger by asserting that if a country launch nuclear weapons it will spark deadly response from other nations. The nuclear characteristic of deterrent, they argued, is exemplified in the Cold War, in which the United States and the Soviet Union hindered themselves from the brink of war due to the horrific possibility of a nuclear war. Mcmahon and Lowther claim that nuclear weapons are still essential deterrents for the United States against countries that are developing nuclear weapons to
Szilard a pioneer in the field of atomic power with 59 of his fellow scientist understands how this new type of power will be evolving continuously with the course of its development. Szilard made compelling point regarding how this weapon could be used against America and how will endanger the welfare of the nation. In this essay, I will be explaining why I think Leo Szilard does a great job in providing an argument that should stop the use of atomic bombs.
Attacks like these show the nation that although we are a superpower, we are open targets. Any major attack on the United States would unify the people because it would instill fear, which would make them want to prevent it from happening again. I believe it would be more difficult now to unite the country compared to World War II because less people knew about the corruption that sometimes occurs within the government. With the advancement of technology and the press, people are much more wary and distrustful of the government. For example, after the invasion of Iraq, it was shown that there was no point for it except to obtain oil because Osama Bin Laden was not there.