Preview

The Similarities And Differences Between The Democrats And The Republican Party

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1028 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Similarities And Differences Between The Democrats And The Republican Party
The game of politics - with Congress, the White House, and the welfare of America on the line - is a playing field of innumerable values and beliefs. Despite a near infinite combination of political identities most of America falls under one of two groups, the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. Naturally, with more than 320 million citizens divided into two parties their opinions will vary, but there are many distinct differences between Democrats and Republicans. Some of the many heated debates between the two parties are on the topics of military spending, immigration, and gun control. The majority of Democrats want to lower military spending, accept illegal immigrants, and limit the abilities of American citizens to own firearms. …show more content…
As well as directly protecting the United States, the military is involved in armed conflicts the world over. Many Democrats wish to pull back on military spending. There are two major arguments on why the United States should spend less on the military: cuts to defence spending could help budget relief, and America should focus its efforts into diplomacy rather than military force. During the Obama Administration defence spending dropped about 15%. Another aspect of the Democrat agenda is denuclearisation. Many politicians, including Hillary Clinton, have worked towards restriction and out right banning of nuclear weapons from the United States as well as foreign powers. Denuclearisation would help keep the threat of nuclear war from arising. The Republicans have quite a different approach to the Armed Forces. Republicans such as Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump called for “Peace Through Strength”, the belief that a strong military can prevent armed conflict from occurring in the first place. Military spending went up in the time of both President Reagan and W. Bush, and is set to do so again under the Trump Administration. Republicans too are more likely to think of nuclear weapons as a necessity in todays forms of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    This is concerning because in an interview when Trump was asked about the Nuclear Triad according to a Rolling Stone article he stated "we have to be extremely vigilant and extremely careful when it comes to nuclear. Nuclear changes the whole ballgame. Frankly, I would have said get out of Syria; get out – if we didn't have the power of weaponry today. The power is so massive that we can't just leave areas that 50 years ago or 75 years ago we wouldn't care. It was hand-to-hand combat.". 71 years ago was around the time World War II started and I'm positive it wasn't hand to hand combat. He has such little knowledge about a lot of things you need to now about to be a politician and run the whole country. Judging by these statements I can safely say Donald Trump should not be responsible for a power that if used incorrectly can devastate the world till the end of…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Democracy within America was destined to unite citizens through political participation and influence; however, there has been a constant battle between differing ideologies that divides the very citizens it's meant to unite. Two parties represent each side of the political spectrum, each with their own values and beliefs detailed within their political platforms defined during their respective national conventions. These specified policies often disagree with each other; for example, in the case of abortion, one is pro-choice while the other is pro-life. This, consequently, leads to both parties working in opposition of each other to further their platforms. In addition to the disparity between both radical parties, the political moderates…

    • 365 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    This book is structured as a debate between the authors on the subject of nuclear proliferation. Waltz “argues that because nuclear weapons ‘will never the less spread,’ the end result will be stabilizing. His main point is that ‘nuclear weapons make wars hard to start’ and that even radical states will act like rational ones because of the mutually deterrent effort of nuclear weapons. Sagan . . . fears the worst because of ‘inherent limits in organizational reliability.…

    • 1991 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    A lapsed and totally out of date strategy of deference basically saying that nuclear weapons are becoming more complex and no one knows what they are capable any more. Nuclear-weapon threats to the United States and its allies have steadily increased over the past 20 years, but because they're so different from the global thermonuclear threat of the Cold War, they have gone virtually unnoticed. Russia tops the list. First, it is still the only nation capable of destroying the United States. Second, Russia must increase its nuclear-weapons capability, as this is the only reason for its being considered a superpower. Third, over the past decade, the Russians have changed their military strategy to one based on the early use of nuclear weapons in all military conflicts, large or small. Fourth, they have preserved thousands of Cold War–era tactical nuclear weapons—a force unmatched by any Western power.(Monroe ,2009) Russia has been researching, developing, testing and producing advanced and highly unstable weapons. Which are relatively clean weapons but unleash high levels of intense radiation. This means that over the years the other nations could be researching the tech for a new and improved nuke and we might be falling behind in our own…

    • 1848 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Waltz and Sagan

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages

    a conventional war, so they need to save their nukes – they will only use them if…

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Nuclear weapons, and the states that possess them, cause tension and paranoia amongst their allies and enemies.…

    • 2175 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    It can be easy to say “Disarm your nuclear weapon” but imagine United States without this, it’s like to sign their own death warrant and worst because this country has a historical responsibility to those nations that are under communist and also the one that are able to get to like South Korea all this by the policy of containment. In the main moment that US get to disarm their nuclear weapons we can considered this our last day in this world because their enemies will attack immediately.…

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Mutual Assure Destruction

    • 3122 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Some will point to Cold War history and conclude that a state of mutual assured destruction is better than war.…

    • 3122 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Nuclear Weapons

    • 1352 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Non-Proliferation is a limitation of production such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The big five: United States, Britain, France, China, and former Soviet Union agreed to dismantle arsenals and signatory nations would not possess nuclear weapons (Conn). Although North Korea has become the world’s ninth nuclear power, they withdrew from the treaty in January 2003. Since then, North Korea processed enough plutonium for five nuclear bombs (Norris). America should and does have a defense against this. After the nuclear warfare in the past, many people believe it will never happen again because nobody would ever want that damage to their own country. Even though this may be true, having our own weapons is safer and better for America (Robinson). Another treaty to reduce the nuclear weapons of the world will not stop other countries from having the weapons; therefore the United States should not disengage from the nuclear stalemate to ensure the safety of the American people.…

    • 1352 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Paper on Nuclear Weapons

    • 1988 Words
    • 8 Pages

    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 “destructive force” as it defines what a nuclear weapon is. These weapons are so destructive that they have only been used twice in the course of warfare, both times were during World War II when the United States sought to end the war. Within a couple of days in August of 1945 the U.S bombed the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The use of these weapons resulted in the deaths of 200,000 people in Japan and caused Japan to surrender officially ending the war. The ethical status of the use of those bombs and the role they played in getting Japan to surrender remains a subject of debate. Though nuclear weapons have not been used in warfare since World War II countries still have nuclear arsenals. These weapons remain a hot button issue in the international community and can be the source of conflict between countries. Furthermore, states have their views on nuclear weapons, whether they are a liberalist view or a realist view, and how they apply to their foreign policy. Nuclear weapons are too destructive a weapon for any state to have. The effects are devastating and in the wrong hands could cause chaos. Nuclear weapons should be destroyed and no country should have a nuclear arsenal. However, this leads to one particular question. Why do states feel they have to be nuclear armed or have nuclear superiority?…

    • 1988 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Whether one concludes a positive or negative answer to this question the argumentation would benefit if emanating from Kenneth Waltz reasoning, that in 1981 provoked a debate that until this day is engaging scholars and strategists. Waltz’s positive answer to the question stood, and stands, in sharp contrast to the general public understanding that proliferation of nuclear weapons is dangerous and undesirable. The classical debate that Waltz initiated has been focused on whether nuclear weapons create stability or not. Many scholars have acknowledged the need to broaden the focus and taking other factor into account, for example implications nuclear weapons have for economy or environment (Knopf 2004: 42-43). Because of the limit of this paper I will build my argument within the scope of the classical debate in order to answer the question.…

    • 1906 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Nuclear Weapon

    • 1996 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Many people throughout the world state that nuclear weapons have sparked fear throughout the world and need to be removed. The common problem that these researchers see is the possibility of a “nuclear winter.” Scientists say that the ongoing use of nuclear weapons will release so many particles in to the air that it will block out the sun and plummet the world into an eternal winter. Furthermore, researchers have discovered that if terrorists can obtain nuclear arms, they can accelerate the shift into “nuclear winter” and cause mass destruction on the planet in the process. The issue is that in the midst of a world currently filled with war and turmoil, national leaders continue to insist that the world’s supply of nuclear weapons is actually a shield, an asset in preventing the complete destruction of the world; however, the reality is that nuclear weapons are swords of annihilation, which will plunge the world into the devastating “nuclear winter” (McNamara).…

    • 1996 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Nuclear disarmament should stick to the principles of maintaining global strategic balance and stability and undiminished security for all. The development of missile defense systems that undermine global strategic balance and stability should be abandoned.…

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    At the same time, we recognize that nuclear weapons engage the legitimate interests of human kind. Pakistan has always joined its voice in building a global consensus in favour of nuclear restraints. Now, as a declared nuclear weapon state,…

    • 2118 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    At present, simple possession of nuclear weapons operates as an element of pressure or deterrence amidst political conflicts. In its eagerness to gain a place in the nuclear community on the planet, North Korea has reported developing new types of strategic weapons, including atomic and hydrogen bombs.…

    • 982 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays