Essay About Nuclear Disarmament

Essay about Nuclear Disarmament
Nuclear Disarmament Since the early 1940's, two world powers, the U.S. and USSR (currently Russia), have been increasing their nuclear weapons
arsenal. In recent years, many other countries, such as: India, Great Britain, France, China, Pakistan, and Israel have begun nuclear stockpiles. Since
the Cold War has ended and the USSR collapsed, nuclear weapons have been left unguarded or missing. The effect of this lack of security has raised
the world's awareness on attempting to control nuclear stockpiles. Also, there are concerns of nuclear power plants producing uranium and plutonium as
a by–product; the two fuels are used in producing nuclear devices. Although these nuclear power plants were never meant to produce uranium and
...show more content...
Robert Oppenheimer, and chemist Harold Urey are associated with the project headed by U.S. Army engineer Major General Leslie Groves.2
After World War II, other types of nuclear weapons have been developed to set off the energy of lighter elements, such as hydrogen. In these
bombs the source of energy is the fusion process, in which nuclei of the hydrogen isotopes combine to form a heavier helium nucleus. Weapons
research has resulted in the production of bombs that range in power from a fraction of a kiloton (equivalent to 1000 tons of TNT) to many
megatons (equivalent to 1 million tons of TNT). Furthermore, the physical size of the bomb has been drastically reduced, permitting the
development of nuclear artillery shells and small missiles that can be fired from portable launchers in the field.3 Although nuclear bombs were
originally developed as strategic weapons, nuclear weapons are now available for a variety of both strategic and tactical applications. Not only can
different types of aircraft deliver nuclear bombs, but rockets and guided missiles of many sizes can now carry nuclear warheads. They can be
launched from the ground, the air, or under the water. Large rockets can carry multiple warheads for delivery to separate targets.4 These large rockets
could lead to severe problems in society if they fall into a civilian's hands.
Civilians have created nuclear reactors that generate electricity for cities,
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Persuasive Essay On Nuclear Weapons
Nuclear weaponry has an extensive past. These weapons of mass destruction were introduced in World War 2 with the bombings of two major cities
in Japan as a method to end the war. Then, in the 1960s, these WMD's acted as a key part of the Cuban Crisis, which almost led to an entire war
between the Soviet Union and America. Recently, the militaristic country of North Korea has started broadcasting threats to the United States, once
again with nukes. History has repeated itself, as the world fears for its own safety again. Like many other decisions made by governments, the choice
of keeping nuclear weapons poses many questions. Why do we need them? When will we use them? What do they do? The general answers to these
questions, as explained by the governments around the world, are: A deterrence to other countries from using their own WMD's. A potential solution to
possible events that may happen in the future. A way to prevent war There are other responses too, unfortunately, these still bears a similarity by being
weak too. Many of these arguments are based upon the fact that there may be a possible future in which there may be a need for nuclear weapons. The
potential solution to a potential problem is not substantial enough to warrant their continuous support, and by keeping these weapons around, the
public is constantly living in a state of fear and panic. I believe that all governments in possession of nuclear weapons must disarm their weapons
immediately. My argument,

Argumentative Essay On Nuclear Weapons
Imagine a weapon that can kill 120,000 people in a blink of an eye. A weapon that can produce power of over 50 megatons of TNT. A weapon that
not only the impact of it hitting the ground is dangerous but the aftermath of the weapon is just as deadly. And if that's not enough to make you on
edge, what if I told you that this weapon can be detonated from multiple different countries in just a few minutes if they feel like it. Now are you
concerned? Well first let's figure out how and who has this control before we answer if this weapon is a problem. Nuclear energy is the energy that
holds neutrons and protons together in the nucleus of an atom. This energy is an effective way that can result in the production of electricity.
Whenever one of these physical reactions take place it engenders a slight loss in mass, however this small loss of mass generates a lot of heat
energy. This is the same principles that Albert Einstein explained with his famous equation, E=mc2. Nuclear energy, or more specifically military
nuclear energy is a "super power" or very special powerful weapon that is seen as really dangerous or defensive in the eyes of the opposing country.
How dangerous? Dangerous to the point that an average regular sized nuclear weapon that detonates over a city would burn away 40 to 65 square
miles in the blink of an eye. some countries have the privilege or curse of owning nuclear weapons. Some of these countries include: The United States,
Russia, The United Kingdom,

The Controversy Of Nuclear Weapons Essay
The previously accepted nature of war stemmed from the Clausewitzian trinity: war is emotional, an experience wrought with passion, violence, and
enmity; uncertainty, chance, and friction pervade the medium of war; however, because war is not an end in itself, and because, as a means, it is
subordinate to its political aims, war must be subject to reason (Clausewitz, 89). With the first employment of nuclear weapons, however, strategists and
military theorists began to question Clausewitz's foundational ideas (Winkler, 58). Similarly, Allan Winkler, in agreeing with Bernard Brodie's thesis,
opines that the advent of nuclear weapons fundamentally changed the nature of war. Winkler's assertion stems from his argument that such a nuclear
duel would yield a post–war environment incapable of recovery for any parties involved (62). He further describes Brodie's realization that "[t]he
atomic bomb is not just another and more destructive weapon to be added to an already long list. It is something which threatens to make the rest of
the list relatively unimportant." (62) Ultimately, Winkler abridges Brodie's assessment in stating that "the United States was caught in the paradox of
having to prepare for a war it did not plan to fight." (63) The American doctrine of deterrence stemmed from the development of nuclear weapons.
Strategic analysts, using this development as a point of departure, recognized that a nuclear capability established a defense scenario that was, in fact,

Nuclear Weapons Essay
Exam 3 Nuclear weapons play a significant role in our understanding of international relations. As seen in the class lecture slides, states often embark
on nuclear weapons programs to counterbalance the power of other states. This is particularly true for states such as China and Iran, who are trying to
balance the power of the United States. States such as China, Russia, and the United States are all powerful international influences. This is partially
due to the fact that they are a part of the United Nations Security Council and own nuclear weapons. If they did not have nuclear weapons, it is hard
to gauge if they would be as powerful world leaders in militaristic terms if they did not have nuclear weapons. These nuclear weapons act...show more
content...
This is an international treaty that aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and technology surrounding it. This treaty also aims to promote the
peaceful use of nuclear energy, as well as disarming nuclear weapons all together. There is a total of 191 states in the treaty. China, France, Russia, the
United Kingdom, and the United States are all permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. This treaty is what allows for some states
to have nuclear weapons. Other states, such as developing nations also do not have the funds or technology to create nuclear weapons. Personally, I
cannot envision a world with without nuclear weapons. However, I can imagine a world with many more states with nuclear weapons. I think that that
is a much more feasible future due to the actions of our past. I support states sharing the technology to create nuclear weapons, so that each state is on
a level playing field. If the states that do not have nuclear weapons (or the technology to create them) were hit, they would be devastated with little to
no way to retaliate. If the technology was shared, nuclear weapons could act more offensively, in the manner that states would not launch them
knowing that once they did they would be hit right back. Nuclear weapons play a significant role in our understanding of international relations. They
are the weapons that shape the most powerful governments in the world. These weapons act most often offensively because they are

Nuclear Weapons And Its Effects On The World
In August 1942, the United states employed 130,000 people and funneled 2 billion dollars into the production of the world's first nuclear weapons:
atomic bombs that would later be used to devastate the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, effectively ending World War I. Since then,
several countries have effectively worked with nuclear weapons and developed arms of their own. Currently, there are an estimated 15,000 nuclear
weapons in the world today, with 2,000 active and ready to launch. While they were made in effort to keep nations safe, these arms are exceptionally
perilous and carry a multitude of drawbacks with them. Because nuclear weapons require large sums of money in order to be created and maintained,
leave long–lasting negative effects on the environment when used, and destroy countless human lives, they do not make the world safer. Over the
years, a myriad of money has been spent by numerous countries to develop, innovate and maintain nuclear weapons. For example, when the United
States was first developing their nuclear arms from 1940–1996, they expended a minimum of 5.8 trillion dollars building the weapons and preparing to
use them. Even now, they average about 20 billion dollars per year solely on the weapon's upkeep. Additionally, including the US, the top eight
countries involved in nuclear development spent a total of almost 105 billion dollars in 2011 on their weapons. This considerable sum of money could
aid an innumerable amount problems

The Pros And Cons Of World War II
Today, it is known everywhere that if a nuclear war is waged, it could mean the destruction of our world as we know it. Nuclear weapons were
used to end World War II, and they could very well be used if WWIII occurred, it may end also using nuclear weapons, which could destroy us.
Albert Einstein once said, "I know not what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones" ("I know
not..."Einstein, Albert). Einstein was implying that WWIII would set humanity to the Stone Age. Our country and the rest of the countries with
nuclear weapons need to get rid of them before one of us start a war. Fears spread in 1939, when it was discovered that the secrets of splitting a
uranium atom was discovered by German physicists. Enrico Fermi and Albert Einstien fled to the United States and they wrote to President Roosevelt
urging him to create an atomic research program after both deciding that the Roosevelt should be told about the possible dangers of atomic technology.
The Manhattan Project became the name of the effort to create an Atomic bomb in 1941. Over 120,000 people worked on the Manhattan Project and
nearly two billion dollars were spent on research and development. Secrecy was important, not even Truman, the Vice–President, knew until he was
President. On the 16th of July, the year 1945, near Alamogordo, New Mexico, the first detonation of an atomic bomb took place.At the end of WWII,
and after Germany had surrendered, Japan had

Nuclear Weapon?s Future Essay
For almost a half a century, the United States and the U.S.S.R. fought a nuclear arms war, the "Cold War." The "Cold War" officially ended August
19, 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed. Ironically, the war ended without a battle or a shot fired. In fact, nuclear weapons have only been used
once. In the Second World War, the United States dropped twonuclear bombs, one on Hiroshima, the other on Nagasaki. So, what is the future of the
Nuclear Weapons Policy, housed in the United States? For now, the future seems to lie in reduction and deterrence.
In 1991, the United States and Russia signed the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I). According to the treaty, the United States and Russia
reduce the number of strategic nuclear...show more content...
From 1940 to 1996, the Brooking Institution estimates that the U.S. government spent roughly five and a half trillion dollars in preparation for a
nuclear war, in today's terms (3.5 actual). That would be the combination of all the Fortune 500 companies' revenue. Then in 1995, they consumed
another twenty–seven billion dollars to prevent a nuclear war. In fact, each of the B–2 bomber lifecycle cost falls above two and a half billion dollars,
accounting for about fifty–five percent of the total spending on nuclear capabilities.
During the cold War Era, nuclear power became the strategic deterrence against both a nuclear attack and a major conventional war, because a more
effective plan had not happened and the adversarial relationship between the U.S. and Soviet Union made it irresponsible to rely on good intentions to
prevent a nuclear assault.
The character of nuclear weapons and the diverse means for delivering meant that attempts to defend the United States or its allies against nuclear
attacks on the population could be over come with much less effort than would have to be invested in the defenses...[However] deterrence is likely to
succeed only if there are credible plans for what to do if it fails, but constructing such a plan is exceedingly difficult, and attempts to make the threat of
nuclear retaliation credible can be

The Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Essay
Introduction
The emergence of nuclear weapons was brought about by distrust amongst states, following progress in nuclear research into uranium fission. Fearing
that Germany would create a nuclear weapon first, the United States employed vast resources into nuclear research and developing the first nuclear
weapon. The Soviet Union followed by testing its first atomic bomb in 1949, thereby beginning a nuclear arms race amongst countries that continues to
the present day.
The official nuclear countries, Russia, France, United States, United Kingdom and China have shown no plans of giving up their nuclear weapons,
fueling proliferation by non–nuclear states. Although numerous non–nuclear countries have sought nuclear weapons, few are...show more content...
In 'The Clash of Civilizations' Samuel Huntington argues that states will continue to be at loggerheads as they compete for military and economic
power, and control over international institutions. Religion has also been a source of conflict between states and civilizations, as some states seek to
impose their religious values on others.
These sources of conflict have led to fear by states that the security of nations could be compromised at any time. This is more so in regions with a
poor security record, such as the Middle East. Fear creates a need to enhance security, and many countries have opted to go nuclear so as to
accomplish this task. A good example is in Pakistan, a country that came to be following it's secession from India under religious guise. Pakistan has
been engaged in confrontations with India which have led to wars in the past.
The country chose to seek nuclear weapons to protect itself from the threat it felt came from India's larger military capabilities. Being a smaller
economy with less advanced technologies, Pakistan felt that investment in an atomic bomb would serve to deter India from attacking its sovereignty.
This however began a nuclear weapons race in the region as India also sought to develop nuclear weapons, which were successfully tested in 1998.
India's proliferation of nuclear weapons was however not

Nuclear Weapons And Its Effects On The World
Strategic discourses tend to discuss about nuclear weapons, and it is generally linked to superiority or inferiority, or again parity between the
hegemons or powers in competition; it is linked to emulation and even conflict in the world. The concept of parity stays unclear while it is evoked by
different administrations within the US as a perfect way to arms race and also negotiations on reductions or removals of arms . This concern is not
necessarily shared by the other powers: the USSR has always been boasting or looking for a kind of weapons superiority, at least throughout the
European continent, on the other side, China ignores that power and other countries rather seek a nuclear sufficiency which ensures a real deterrent.
The moment when this concern is most highly expressed, informally or formally, is, however, not only on arms but in international negotiations where
each party tries to define for itself and its opponents–level partners powers, often calculated based on settlements and discussed the powers of
armaments. It's in that context that SALT I and the ABM treaty had been signed, after the Vietnam War and in that situation of arms competition of
the superpowers. There we wonder if that treaty had all it was expected for when they were signed or were the arms control just part of Kissinger's
New World Order? At first, we have the article of Stoll and McAndrew, where we have a behind
–the–scenes of the signature of the treaties with a serie
of studies that

Nuclear weapons play a significant role in our understanding of international relations. As seen in the class lecture slides, states often embark on
nuclear weapons programs to counterbalance the power of other states. This is particularly true for states such as China and Iran, who are trying to
balance the power of the United States. States such as China, Russia, and the United States are all powerful international influences. This is partially
due to the fact that they are a part of the United Nations Security Council and own nuclear weapons. If they did not have nuclear weapons, it is hard
to gauge if they would be as powerful world leaders in militaristic terms if they did not have nuclear weapons. These nuclear weapons act as both
...show more content...
This is an international treaty that aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and technology surrounding it. This treaty also aims to promote the
peaceful use of nuclear energy, as well as disarming nuclear weapons all together. There is a total of 191 states in the treaty. China, France, Russia, the
United Kingdom, and the United States are all permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. This treaty is what allows for some states
to have nuclear weapons. Other states, such as developing nations also do not have the funds or technology to create nuclear weapons. Personally, I
cannot envision a world with without nuclear weapons. However, I can imagine a world with many more states with nuclear weapons. I think that that
is a much more feasible future due to the actions of our past. I support states sharing the technology to create nuclear weapons, so that each state is on
a level playing field. If the states that do not have nuclear weapons (or the technology to create them) were hit, they would be devastated with little to
no way to retaliate. If the technology was shared, nuclear weapons could act more offensively, in the manner that states would not launch them
knowing that once they did they would be hit right back. Nuclear weapons play a significant role in our understanding of international relations. They
are the weapons that shape the most powerful governments in the world. These weapons act both defensively and offensively because they

Nuclear Weapons Research Paper
Nuclear Weapons
A Nuclear weapon is any weapon that gets its destructive power from the transformation of matter in atoms into energy. They include missiles, bombs,
artillery shells, mines and torpedoes. Another name for nuclear weapons are
Atomic bombs or Hydrogen bombs. The United States was the first country to ever use a Nuclear weapon in battle against Japan.
The major arguments for a test ban was first proposed in the 1950Г•s.
Today, however, the stopping of radioactive fallout and the superpower arms race are still in negotiation. Nations have sought to limit the testing of
nuclear weapons to protect people and the environment from nuclear radiation and to slow...show more content...
They find their reason as a lame excuse to start setting off explosions again. The treaty plays a very important role in creating a barrier to stop the
spread of nuclear weapons. The two biggest problems are with nuclear weapons nowadays is that testing isnГ•t necessary to develop a workable,
Hiroshima–type fission bomb in this age of computers and wide spread access to nuclear data, and India nor Pakistan, the two most worrisome nuclear
powers is likely to sign any deal at all.
The United States, Great Britain, Russia, and France have joined a moratorium on all testing. Only China continues to develop lightweight, multiple
warheads that could be deployed on submarine based missiles. Claiming discrimination, India insists it will not accede to a test ban unless the
declared nuclear states agree to give up their nuclear arsenals by a certain date. Pakistan also says if India does not sign, they wonГ•t either. One
frequently mentioned scenario is for India to conduct a quick series of tests to develop a thermonuclear weapon and only then give in to international
pressure to sign the treaty.
The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty if eventually agreed to, might not be so comprehensive after all. Meeting in Geneva the 61 nation conference on
Disarmament again failed to produce an agreed treaty before breaking up.
Negotiators will return again to produce another final effort for a test ban

The Effects Of Nuclear Weapons
When nuclear weapons were created everyone was amazed by it. It was a huge accomplishment. The first nuclear weapons were used in the cold
war. Soon after that they were used in about every war. Till this day they are still used because it helps not having wars go on for so long but is it
worth causing all this damage?
No doubt about it nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. It can kill millions and destroy a whole city. Even the survivors of the
nuclear weapons soon die later on because of the radiation. There really is no way of getting out alive when it comes to nuclear weapons. They
because so much damage that it takes so many years just to clean up the mess which is the nuclear waste. Just about all anything that comes close to
nuclear weapons get effect really badly. What is effected the most it the environment. Nuclear weapons is no joke, once used it changes everything.
Nuclear weapons are made by plutonium, a man made element, that is produced in nuclear reaction. What plutonium is, its transuranic radioactive
chemical? Which is why nuclear weapons contain so much radiation. Enrico Fermi was the main one to make all of this making possible, basically
making the plan go through. Although Albert Einstein was the main one of the process of making the nuclear weapons created.
Nuclear weapons isn't something any country can have. It takes a lot to have one, to update, to even maintain. The cost of a nuclear weapon is extremely

Essay about nuclear weapons advocate peace
Does the existence of nuclear weapons facilitate greater stability in international politics? Why/why not?
The existence of nuclear weapons for better or worse have indubitably impacted our lives in one way or the other. There are the some who find these
weapons to be singularly beneficial. For example Defence Analyst Edward Luttwak said "we have lived since 1945 without another world war
precisely because rational minds...extracted a durable peace from the very terror of nuclear weapons." (Luttwak, 1983). Moreover, Robert Art and
Kenneth Waltz both extrapolate that "the probability of war between American and Russia or between NATO and the Warsaw Pact is practically nil
precisely because the military planning and deployments of each,...show more content...
The U.K and Paris built nuclear weapons due to the impending Soviet military threat and the reduction in the credibility of the U.S guarantee to NATO
alliances after the Soviet Union threatened retaliation. China on the other hand developed the bomb because of the U.S's threat to bomb Beijing at the
end of the Korean War. Furthermore the emergence of hostility in Sino–Soviet relations in the 1960s further inspired the "robust and affordable
security" of nuclear weapons since without it, China's deterrence was thought to be inadequate compared to nuclear states. (Goldstein, 1992) Following
the development of the bomb in China in 1964, India who had just fought a war with China in 1962 felt compelled to follow in its footsteps. Then
following India's nuclear test explosion, Pakistan felt it needed to step up its nuclear program facing a recently hostile neighbor with both nuclear
weapons and conventional military security. Ultimately as a result of this domino effect, there have been no conflicts between these previous hostile
states due to the generation of nuclear weapons; further emphasizing the key role nuclear weapons plays in the stability of international politics.
To further emphasize this point that countries acquire nuclear weapons as

Nuclear weapons are one of, if not the most dangerous weapons in the world today and they are one of the biggest issues the world faces at this
current moment. They have the capability of destroying entire cities and then some that could result in millions of deaths within seconds.
Radiation from the blasts would kill even more people throughout years to come. They were first used in 1945 at the end of World War II, when
the United States dropped Little Boy and Fat Man in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to 'save' the lives of American soldiers. Since then, a nuclear arms
race was born and it's becoming more of a concern as time moves forward. Albert Einstein, who was the creator of the nuclear bomb once said "I
know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." Countries should not have access to
nuclear weapons because it destroys the environment, there is a possibility of a nuclear war that will end in mass destruction of the world, and
countries could save both revenue and resources. There are many nuclear bombing tests that happen throughout each year and it's extremely unhealthy
for the environment let alone if a nuclear war happened. According to scientists, even if a small percentage of the worlds nuclear bombs were set off
during a war, it would have an extremely devastating effect on humanity (Jha). Temperatures would drop quickly because there would be so much
black smoke in the air that the smoke would absorb

Nuclear weapons are a plague on society. These weapons have no positive effects or results, yet many countries today continue to create and stockpile
these weapons. The creation and storing of these weapons have immense costs. They are extremely destructive. The cleanup after the detonation of
one of these bombs can cost millions and the deactivation and decontamination of the weapon itself is incredibly expensive. What do these weapons
actually do? How are they made? What do they cost? How can we stop the creation and use of them? Are there any alternatives to nuclear weapons?
Nuclear weapons are extremely complex devices. Dictionary.com defines a nuclear weapon as "an explosive device whose destructive potential derives
from the...show more content...
The third type of nuclear bomb is the neutron bomb. This type of bomb is also referred to as the "enhanced radiation weapon". This is a small
bomb with a relatively small blast area of approximately two hundred yards, but it has the ability to kill people up to a square mile. Most people die
a very painful death within a week caused by heat and radiation poisoning. This is the bomb that opponents fear the most because of the potential for
use in a smaller area. This bomb is sometimes referred to as the "Dirty Bomb". These weapons are also extremely expensive to create. According to
world history.ABC–Clio.com, as of 1996, the United States has spent approximately four–hundred and nine billion dollars on the creation of these
weapons. All the money for the creation and storage of these weapons comes directly out of the taxpayer's pocket. That brings about another factor in
the nuclear arms dilemma, and that is the cost. The economics that are involved are the manufacturing, the storing, and the upgrading of nuclear
weapons. There is also an additional cost associated with upgrading weapons. This cost involves the disassembling, waste disposal, and then
remanufacturing of a new, more efficient weapon. The estimate for the nuclear weapon program in the United States since it's inception in the 1940's
is a little over 4 trillion dollars. Even though our arsenal has been downsized to about 14,000 war heads, of which 8,750 are active, the government

Nuclear Weapons & Nuclear Warfare Essay
Nuclear Weapons & Nuclear Warfare
Throughout half the century of the 19's hundreds a period of new advancements in the creations of a bomb had arisen. On August 8th, 1939
President Roosevelt received a letter from Albert Einstein which ended up being the fundamental support in the creation of the Atomic Bomb. There
are two types of atomic bombs fusion and fission, the first atomic bomb was created in 1939 by the Manhattan Project, three weeks later after its
first test, it was used in an actual war. It's capable of wiping out a whole entire city and killing instantly anyone in its way. Now we have better more
precise bomb know as hydrogen bombs, these bomb use the energy released when the nuclei of a hydrogen come...show more content...
The two types of nuclear energy would be fission and fusion. As for nuclear fission it gets its energy from the collision of atoms with other atoms
breaking apart with heavy elements such as plutonium or uranium releasing vast energy. Scientist were quick to realize that they could create a
better most efficient more precise bomb, this would be known as the fusion bomb this bomb would acquire its energy when two nuclei of two atoms
combine or fuse together with gases, such as tritium and deuterium. The bomb used on Hiroshima has the energy equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT.
The one used on Nagasaki was named the "Fat Man" for its more power, being able to produce the energy equivalent to 21,000 tons of TNT. There
are now bombs capable of producing much more power, but are not fueled by nuclear energy
With great achievements came problems, and that is exactly what happen in the early 1940–2007. In 1942 the Manhattan project was established to
produce the first atomic weapon, this project created a whopping 100,000 jobs, costing 2 billion, equivalent to 25 billion in today's money. On august
6, 1945 the us drops a uranium bomb over Hiroshima killing over 140,000, following a second bomb being dropped on Nagasaki. On august 29, 1949
the Soviet Union would be the second nation to successfully create and test a nuclear weapon. In the late 1950's the UK test its first nuclear weapon,
later the next month the

On August 6th, 1945 nearly 80,000 people lost their lives instantly in the bombing of Hiroshima. Three days later more than 70,000 people died
instantly with the bombing of Nagasaki (Hall). Those two events remain the only two times in history where nuclear weapons were used in warfare.
Less than twenty years later the U.S.S.R tested a nuclear bomb that recorded an explosion 3,333 times as powerful as the ones dropped on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki (Bennett). The immense amount of destruction that could be caused by these weapons is why the great powers of the world should
come together and decided to destroy their nuclear arsenals. Nuclear weapons could easily render the entire race extinct and it is terrifying to think that
many countries have the power to cause a nuclear fallout. Nuclear disarmament would not be easy, it would be very expensive, time–consuming and
nerve–racking. A nuclear warhead on average costs the government about $55 million. This may seem like a lot but the U.S currently has nearly
7,000 nuclear weapons. If you included production and storing costs of all those nukes the U.S has spent about $5.8 Trillion on its current arsenal
("The Cost of U.S Nuclear Weapons"). That's an insanely large amount of money. You might be wondering if it cost that much just to get and hold on
to those nukes it must be incredibly expensive to disarm all those nukes. Not really, it would cost roughly $7 billion a year per decade to begin
disarming our current nuclear

Nuclear Weapon Production Apocalypse
Hunter Honeycutt
Western Kentucky University Glasgow
Nuclear Weapon Production Apocalypse
If the production of nuclear weaponry is not diminished, it will cause the end of everything. With the production of nuclear weapons increasing, it will
only be a matter of time until a nuclear war breaks out. When a nuclear weapon is used, it has three killing modes. The first would be the impact, when
the bomb first hits. The second would be the shockwave that extends outward a good deal. Thirdly, the radiation effect would kill several more after that.
How does a nuclear weapon work you might ask? Well there are two ways a nuclear weapon can work. One is nuclear fission and the other is nuclear
fusion. In nuclear fission, the nucleus of an atom is split in two by a neutron. To do this, isotopes will need to be present such as uranium
(uranium–235, uranium–233) or plutonium (plutonium–239) (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament). An isotope is the same element but with different
numbers. Nuclear fusion is kind of how the sun works. According to Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, two small atoms are fused together to create
one large atoms. This typically requires hydrogen or hydrogen isotopes (deuterium, tritium), to form a larger one (helium isotopes) (Campaign for
Nuclear Disarmament).
As stated in a previous paragraph, a nuclear weapon will kill on contact. According to a website article by History.com, the first bomb that was

Essay About Nuclear Disarmament

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Essay About Nuclear Disarmament