The Dangers of Nuclear Weapons
Suzanne Hannigan
Professor Mark Shirk
International Politics
6 December 2021
Nuclear weapons have caused incredible and irreversible destruction. This type of war and destruction was not possible in the past, but now nuclear weapons play a daily threat to international peace. Would the world be better off without nuclear weapons? I believe the answer to this question is yes. A world without nuclear weapons would eliminate the threat of mass destruction and significantly lower war casualties. The most important aspect of international peace should ultimately be the protection and preservation of people's lives. A weapon capable of such immeasurable destruction could never be considered desirable in any capacity. It simply is not worth the lives it causes.
The elimination of nuclear weapons would also ensure that mutually assured destruction could never come to be. A nuclear war has the potential to truly wipe out the entire human race. This fact alone should persuade people to believe a world without nuclear weapons would be more desirable. Nuclear weapons capability is much too strong to ever truly be justified in warfare. If nuclear weapons did not exist the world would be a much safer place. This ultimately should be desirable to all states. Morally, nuclear weapons cannot be justified.
Although this is true, the fact that nuclear weapons bring a quick and efficient end to wars cannot be ignored. I, however, believe this is not a justification for the lives that are ultimately lost by using nuclear weapons. War is unavoidable, but no other war method brings about the destruction that nuclear weapons bring. That being said, nuclear weapons should be considered unnecessary in the big picture of war. However, the possibility of nuclear weapons ever truly going away is near impossible. Since nuclear weapons have already been set in motion, there is no real way to stop this progression. Even if all states agreed to never use their weapons, the weapons would still be in the states possession and there is no guarantee that states would stay to their word. This is also ignoring the fact that most states would most likely never agree to such a proposal. With that in mind, the world would still theoretically be a better place without the insistence of nuclear weapons.
Suzanne makes a valid point here that nuclear weapons have brought more negatives than positives to our collective world. However, since they have been introduced it is not feasible to destroy them all as that would create a dilemma where everyone would have to trust everyone else, which is not feasible. Rather, nuclear deterrence is the course of action currently as no one will actually start nuclear war if everyone else has nuclear weapons as that would create mutually assured destruction.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, it would be near impossible to destroy all nuclear weapons. But, the world would be more ideal if they were to never exist theoretically. In a perfect world nuclear weapons would not be a danger, but this is not the case. Nuclear deterrence is most likely the best case scenario in the present day.
ReplyDelete