-
rahulsaxena8
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:54 am
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Nuclear weapons are potentially more devastating than any other weapon in human history. We must stop pointing the nuclear gun at our own heads. The best way to lower the threat of nuclear war is for the nuclear capable nations, including the U.S., to lead by example and dismantle their own nuclear arsenals."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your viewpoint using reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
RESPONSE:
"With great power comes great responsibility". Nuclear technology should be used for the
benefit of the mankind and not for its destruction. A nuclear war has the potential to destroy the entire planet. Hence, I agree with the author that in order to avoid a nuclear war countries should dismantle their nuclear arsenals. Below mentioned are the reasons for my opinion.
Firstly, any country that has nuclear weapon reasons that these weapons are for its own protection against attacks from other countries. But if the sole purpose of developing nuclear weapons is to acheive peace then other means like approaching a neighbouring country for a peace dialoghue should be employed. For exapmle, when India tested nuclear weapons in 1999 it started an arms race in South Asia. Countries such as Pakistan, South Korea all have nuclear weapons and such the tension in the region has increased due to the possession of nuclear weapons by these countries. Hence, to ensure peace a diplomatic approach to resolve the differences should be followed rather than the threat of nuclear weapons.
Secondly, nuclear capable nations such as U.S, Russia, France etc who have access to advanced nuclear technology should lead by example and abandon the use of nuclear weapons. As of now these countries are quick in posting sanctions on other countries such as Iran, who are trying to develop nuclear weapons technology. If these countries get rid of their own nuclear arsenals it will send a clear message to other countries that the nuclear weapons are not required for a peaceful and safe existence of a country as majority of the nations are tyring to develop nuclear weapons technology to counter other countries which possess such technlogies and weapons.
Thirdly, lessons should be learnt from the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasakki during second world war. A hydrogen bomb was dropped at these two cities by Airforce of U.S., the effects of those bombings are still felt today. A nuclear bomb can cause devastation several times that a hydrogen bomb can. Therefore, for the sake of world peace there should be a total dismantling of the nuclear weapons of all the countries.
In sum, to ensure that a nuclear war doesn't happen, all the countries should give up their nuclear weapons. This could be regulated by a nuetral body like United Nations to ensure that no one gets an unfair advantage. Also, to promote world peace appraoch of countries like Switzerland could be followed which doesn't maintain any army, there by eleminating the need of keeping nuclear weapons.
"Nuclear weapons are potentially more devastating than any other weapon in human history. We must stop pointing the nuclear gun at our own heads. The best way to lower the threat of nuclear war is for the nuclear capable nations, including the U.S., to lead by example and dismantle their own nuclear arsenals."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your viewpoint using reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
RESPONSE:
"With great power comes great responsibility". Nuclear technology should be used for the
benefit of the mankind and not for its destruction. A nuclear war has the potential to destroy the entire planet. Hence, I agree with the author that in order to avoid a nuclear war countries should dismantle their nuclear arsenals. Below mentioned are the reasons for my opinion.
Firstly, any country that has nuclear weapon reasons that these weapons are for its own protection against attacks from other countries. But if the sole purpose of developing nuclear weapons is to acheive peace then other means like approaching a neighbouring country for a peace dialoghue should be employed. For exapmle, when India tested nuclear weapons in 1999 it started an arms race in South Asia. Countries such as Pakistan, South Korea all have nuclear weapons and such the tension in the region has increased due to the possession of nuclear weapons by these countries. Hence, to ensure peace a diplomatic approach to resolve the differences should be followed rather than the threat of nuclear weapons.
Secondly, nuclear capable nations such as U.S, Russia, France etc who have access to advanced nuclear technology should lead by example and abandon the use of nuclear weapons. As of now these countries are quick in posting sanctions on other countries such as Iran, who are trying to develop nuclear weapons technology. If these countries get rid of their own nuclear arsenals it will send a clear message to other countries that the nuclear weapons are not required for a peaceful and safe existence of a country as majority of the nations are tyring to develop nuclear weapons technology to counter other countries which possess such technlogies and weapons.
Thirdly, lessons should be learnt from the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasakki during second world war. A hydrogen bomb was dropped at these two cities by Airforce of U.S., the effects of those bombings are still felt today. A nuclear bomb can cause devastation several times that a hydrogen bomb can. Therefore, for the sake of world peace there should be a total dismantling of the nuclear weapons of all the countries.
In sum, to ensure that a nuclear war doesn't happen, all the countries should give up their nuclear weapons. This could be regulated by a nuetral body like United Nations to ensure that no one gets an unfair advantage. Also, to promote world peace appraoch of countries like Switzerland could be followed which doesn't maintain any army, there by eleminating the need of keeping nuclear weapons.
