Nuclear Weapons Persuasive Essay

We have entered a new age, an age featuring a profound use of weapons and new groups who threaten the current state of the United States. In the past we have used the threat of nuclear weapons to deter these groups. But we, The United States are not united on the state of these weapons. We are split on whether we should attempt to start an anti nuclear weapon coalition, or to stockpile our weapons in order to prepare ourselves for the seemingly inevitable nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons were created in a time of war, war with more casualties than any other war previously. The second world war was undoubtedly, a terrible war and on August first, 1945 the war seemed far from over, however, after the United States utilized two atomic bombs on the Japanese, they announced their surrender. The United States utilized two atomic weapons which did kill thousands, but created a peace between us and Japan which lasts to this day. If we weigh the pros and cons, the usefulness of a limited arsenal, is much higher than the downsides. They have provided peace as well as an edge in negotiation,
We are not at war with any nuclear powerhouses, but that does not mean we will not be. The
ever growing hostile Russian, and the North Korean governments must be kept in check, they have nuclear weapons and may use them, unless they are dissuaded in diplomatic meetings. But who has what? We the US currently have 7,100 nuclear warheads, and Russia has more with 7,700 warheads, Israel, France, United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, and China have a combined total of 1,100. However we must remember that in the new Start Treaty, both the United States and Russia are limited to 1,550 Nuclear warheads by 2018.
We must ask why do we need these weapons of mass destruction. The United States, currently maintains an arsenal of nuclear weapons to protect themselves and others in this world. With our arsenal, or even 30% of that, we can enforce the unspoken rules, by flexing our nuclear muscles. According to Jonathan Tepperman in Newsweek, nuclear weapons do cause tensions, however major disputes, such as the India/Pakistan dispute in 1998 significantly mellowed when both countries achieved the creation of nuclear weapons, due to the fact neither wanted to be destroyed or completely destroy another.
Examine this chart, it depicts the mushroom cloud, which is proportional to the bomb’s power. In this case, we are examining the bomb used at Hiroshima and the trinity bomb. Compare these to Mike, Bravo, and the Soviet Tsar. The United States has never matched the power of this Tsar bomb. while it may no longer exist, plans still do.
It may be somewhat unfortunate, but in today’s society we must resolve to Mutually Assured Destruction, M.A.D. This is the practice that states if we, the United States are struck by a Nuclear Weapon, we will retaliate with our own nuclear weapons.According to experience reporters for Breaking Defense, a go to idea hub for defense tactics.
“There is no doubt that nuclear weapons are devastating weapons of war. They possess the power to destroy entire civilizations. They also produce radiological effects that can maim and kill for many years after they are used. This, horrible as it may seem, is exactly why we must keep them. The restraint they engender has saved the lives of countless millions — of that there can be no doubt.”
Is it possible to completely disarm nuclear arsenals? Well, we and other countries have started to. In fact, now, South Africa, has a dearth of nuclear weapons. The former president of South Africa F.W. de Klerk, stated that his two steps to improve South Africa’s relation with the world was to release Nelson Mandela, which he did, and to dismantle the nuclear weapons created, which he did. He stated without the looming threat of the Soviet Union why would anyone need nuclear weapons.
While it's true that the looming threat of the Soviet Union is over, we still must look towards the future. Future threats on the United States must be accounted for. We are already limiting and deconstructing our arsenal. A limited arsenal is in fact very similar to having a bat near your bed in a bad neighborhood, or carrying pepper spray to avoid bodily harm.
One major question must be answered sufficiently, if we disarm what would we do with the radioactive fissile currently housed in our nuclear weapons? Only certain ions of Uranium can be used in nuclear power plants, for example, Uranium 238. But, we do not know if we can trust nuclear power plants to house this ion, or any other.
For example, less than a decade ago, Japan had a earthquake which caused a radioactive leak in a very densely populated country, that was a very expensive clean up process. Nuclear power plants are not to be trusted. And the question still stands, what would we do with our radioactive materials, if we disarm?
Consider the Aesop fable, The Farmer and the Viper where ‘One winter a Farmer found a Viper frozen and numb with cold, and out of pity picked it up and placed it in his bosom.
The Viper was no sooner revived by the warmth than it turned upon its benefactor and inflicted a fatal bite upon him; and as the poor man lay dying, he cried, "I have only got what I deserved, for taking compassion on so villainous a creature."’ These villainous creatures exist in this world in the form of dictators, and their council, and are also not to be trusted. A person could theoretically be thoroughly convinced it is our moral obligation to disarm, but won’t in fear of the villainous creatures. We must towards the long run, because if we do not prepare for the future, we could receive a fatal bite, just like the
Farmer.