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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The Cold War was almost the longest period of time without real conflict between two of the world's strongest nations during a century that witnessed two devastating World Wars. The "super powers" of the world built weapons, expanded their arsenal and showcased their military capabilities through decades without active conflict during the Cold War. The leveling power of nuclear weapons was known to the world by then but these countries continued to expand their nuclear arsenals and develop nuclear technology. These nuclear arsenals served as such a big deterrent, that the period witnessed no active conflict. The Cold War is not the ideal text book for a discussion on world peace, but specific elements of the "Cold War" provide a great example for the role of nuclear arsenals in preventing catastrophic international conflicts. The Cold War also serves as an example to the ability of nuclear arsenals in determining the global sphere of influence which was and is so crucial for driving the economic and political landscape of each country.
Ever-expanding nuclear arsenals did not lead to nuclear war. Conversely, the dismantling of nuclear arsenals by countries such as the U.S. does not necessarily reduce the threat of nuclear war. The U.S. will continue to have the technology and the capability to produce nuclear weapons when needed. It cannot be assumed that other countries will follow along on the same foot steps. On the contrary, countries currently incapable of nuclear weapons will continue to pursue the technology required to produce these weapons to improve their standing in the global sphere of influence. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (NTBT) which was considered during its time as one of the solutions to reduce nuclear threat did not stop countries like India and Pakistan from pursuing nuclear technology and transforming into nuclear powers. And in their post-nuclear era, a major border conflict saw the two countries go to the brink of war but withdraw forces and settle for peace potentially due to their nuclear arsenals. Perhaps, the "no-first-use" policy for nuclear weapons that these countries adopted reduced the threat of nuclear war more than the dismantling of nuclear arsenals by the U.S. could.
"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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The Cold War was almost the longest period of time without real conflict between two of the world's strongest nations during a century that witnessed two devastating World Wars. The "super powers" of the world built weapons, expanded their arsenal and showcased their military capabilities through decades without active conflict during the Cold War. The leveling power of nuclear weapons was known to the world by then but these countries continued to expand their nuclear arsenals and develop nuclear technology. These nuclear arsenals served as such a big deterrent, that the period witnessed no active conflict. The Cold War is not the ideal text book for a discussion on world peace, but specific elements of the "Cold War" provide a great example for the role of nuclear arsenals in preventing catastrophic international conflicts. The Cold War also serves as an example to the ability of nuclear arsenals in determining the global sphere of influence which was and is so crucial for driving the economic and political landscape of each country.
Ever-expanding nuclear arsenals did not lead to nuclear war. Conversely, the dismantling of nuclear arsenals by countries such as the U.S. does not necessarily reduce the threat of nuclear war. The U.S. will continue to have the technology and the capability to produce nuclear weapons when needed. It cannot be assumed that other countries will follow along on the same foot steps. On the contrary, countries currently incapable of nuclear weapons will continue to pursue the technology required to produce these weapons to improve their standing in the global sphere of influence. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (NTBT) which was considered during its time as one of the solutions to reduce nuclear threat did not stop countries like India and Pakistan from pursuing nuclear technology and transforming into nuclear powers. And in their post-nuclear era, a major border conflict saw the two countries go to the brink of war but withdraw forces and settle for peace potentially due to their nuclear arsenals. Perhaps, the "no-first-use" policy for nuclear weapons that these countries adopted reduced the threat of nuclear war more than the dismantling of nuclear arsenals by the U.S. could.
