Victor Kelleher’s Taronga and Roland Emmerich’s 2012 reveals to the reader and viewer what could happen if there was a nuclear holocaust or destruction of our environment. We get a clear illustration of man’s reaction in times of devastation. Though both are fictitious we are affected by the chilling possibility of it becoming a reality.…
War brings death and destruction, merciless slaughter and butchery, disease and starvation, poverty and ruin in its wake. Although war may not always be the first answer or the most beneficial, it is an inescapable evil because war has brought the world peace and prosperity while banding people together to fight for a cause. It leads to national growth and solves domestic problems between countries; Injustice and tyranny can be quelled as the aftereffect of war. On the contrary, war includes loss of human life, spreads of diseases, and induces a feeling of anxiety and dismay among communities. The brutal sacrifices that innocent people undergo may not be worth the outcome.…
Michael Howard's short manifesto has impacted the way many people look at war, and how they start. Michael without a shadow of a doubt states in his essay The Causes Of War, “Force, or the threat of it, may not settle arguments, but it does play a considerable part in determining the structure of the world in which we live.” Although Michael merely shrugs at the claims made by sociobiologists he also brings a few important ideas to the table himself. When Michael discusses the subject of fear in parallel to the idea of U.S joining WW1 he tries to emphasize that as a justifiable reason to take part in the war. The author does so by showing how fear was inevitable in the national community.…
Since the begging of time humans have resorted to war in times of conflict or disagreement. Nevertheless, humans have never had tremendous annihilation power up until WWII and the creation of the atomic bomb. Dropping such bomb would ensure thousands of people would lose their lives some of who were innocent and some not. Although, the decision to drop the bomb is controversial it was necessary due to the stakes of sovereignty, ethnic cleansing prevention, and the end to Hitler’s regime. One cannot merely justify killing alone however, one can rationalize and outweigh the outcome if Hitler’s regime would have won the war.…
Lange effectively frames the argument as the collective ‘we’ [153-159]. Through the logic of mutually assured destruction, Lange effectively argues that ‘we’ are all stakeholders in this issue and “there is a community of interest which binds us all to common ground” [169-171]. Later in the speech, Lange blurs the definition of ‘we’ to mean New Zealand and ‘they’ as the United States. This effectively contrasts the ‘they’ who build nuclear weapons do so for their own defence, but have it in their hands to determine the fate of us all (the ‘we’). This form of rhetoric frames both Lange and New Zealand as a concerned citizen of the world, establishes the moral high ground, and appeals to both primary and secondary audience sense of the common good and global community…
I completely agree! I thought Elie Wiesel’s speech was very moving! How often do we turn our heads from the hurt and suffering? I know that I am sometime uncomfortable with watching people suffer but I often don’t do anything about it. I know that there are hungry people in different countries. However, I don’t send money to organizations that will feed the hungry. I want to be a very generous person, but we all have our limits. Especially, since I am in high school I have a hard time saving money and also giving money. Even though I can’t give a lot of money I can volunteer my time. I believe that a lot of what Elie Wiesel still rings…
In this day and age, many may acknowledge the very controversial issue of technology for peace. This subject is so debated because nuclear weapons have the ability to destroy the world as we know it. However, they are essential if we are to protect ourselves. We need to have them, because almost anybody can gain control of them and become a threat. Mutually Assured Destruction insures that both sides need to have weapons of mass destruction to prevent a nuclear war. The use of human soldiers to make peace is too great a risk, and not worth it. With such treacherous weapons as these, it is crucial that we make all the right decisions, but we must also give the world some credit and acknowledge the fact that people have learnt from their mistakes, like what happened in Japan, and nobody wants that to happen again. It is imperative that we have these arms because the technology is already out there and almost anyone can obtain them, Mutually Assured Destruction insures that as long as both sides have them then nobody will strike, and the risk of human casualties is too great and not worth it.…
The reader is told, “Let both sides invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths and encourage the arts and commerce”. The quote is implying that the nation and our allies should focus on the solution of the problem instead blaming who or what caused it. Health scares and running out of food is not always something that we consider as a nation to happen but it does to multiple people even if we did not even realize. Medicine can be a solution to help prevent from emotional stress. People do not sweat the issue of diseases as much even though they do not know the outcome because they believe. It is a for sure thing because it is facts that is backed up by recommended sources either friends, trusted sources, doctors and pharmacist. Another example to help prevent food shortage is by the community uniting and taking matters into their own hands. The way the community can give back is by donating food to their local food banks. Actions cannot make others fearful because they know they have the power to make this world a better place so they feel more fearless instead of fearful. Finally, Fear is an emotion mostly out of care. It is portrayed in current real life situations today like: veterans, homeless people, and people with…
Weapons of all kinds have been used by humanity in wars, sometimes to instigate, and sometimes to make the best of a bad situation. In the case of the atomic bomb there has been a great deal of opposition to it: that it is not necessary to end the war and there are better alternatives to it. In actuality, the atomic is necessary to end the war, and it is not as “evil” as a weapon in war, as many seem to think. It will make the Japanese surrender without engaging in a more harmful and devastating invasion, it is not particularly unique in the amount damage it can cause, and it will stop the Japanese empire, which is belittling and destroying other populations in Asia.…
Claim: The author believes that education must make us aware of humanity’s capability for evil and destruction.…
In James Carroll’s essay, “If Poison Gas Can Go, Why Not Nukes?”, the author tells the readers that it is necessary to eliminate nuclear weapons from the world’s military arsenals. The author supports a universal goal of abolishing all nuclear arms because it prevents a nuclear disaster. The author wrote his essay using statistics which make it very effective. The essay as a whole is straight to the point, easy to read and understand, and well organized. The title straightforwardly tells the reader what the story is about. Although the author makes a very nice argument, the example that he uses is not an appropriate comparison to nuclear weapons. This is because poison gas is not the real problem in the world. While James Carroll views nuclear weapons as very dangerous and should not exist in the world, quite honestly, evil has always existed in people’s heart with or without the nuclear weapons, so all of the weapons should be abolished in the world.…
The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima (August 6th 1945) and Nagasaki (August 9th 1945) remains among the most controversial events in modern history. At the time, the dropping of the atomic bombs was both strategically and morally justified, yet today it is a hotly debated topic, thought to be excessive or unnecessary. However, the dropping of the atomic bombs, while an atrocious act, was in fact the lesser of two evils. The alternative was to prolong one of the bloodiest conflicts in global history and allow for the slaughter of many more people. There were strategic reasons that made the bomb necessary.…
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.…
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.(4)…
The devastating effects of World War 1 brought great attention to the question of global peace. For the first time in history it is recognized that wars between Nations can involve and affect inhabitants of the entire earth.…