Why Nuclear Weapons May Be Keeping us Safe

Nuclear bombs pose a serious danger to our world today, but do they protect us in any way? In this essay I will discuss the question - Do nuclear weapons make our world safer or more dangerous? I found the information in this post from a blogging website made by the United States, people from anywhere can post their ideas on to it, and the people on here have a wide variety of viewpoints on nuclear weapons, and not much bias because they are all bystanders of nuclear weapon production. In this post, I will argue that although having some nuclear weapons has deterred violence, the high number of nuclear weapons and the power they hold has created an unsafe environment.

http://www.troymedia.com/

Have Nuclear Weapons Deterred Violence in the Past?
One writer talks about how Nuclear Weapons are the ultimate war deterrent, he brings up the example that war with the aggressive Soviets may have been unavoidable without the power given by nuclear weapons. I agree with this idea that the power of nuclear weapons gives the holder a strong influence on those around him/her. In the United States case we were safe with that power, but other countries may not be as responsible, and may mistreat the power of Nuclear weapons. Another Writer, Zarkov, disagrees with the first saying that our nuclear arsenal failed to prevent 911, and missiles on Cuba. I disagree with this because in thee cases there was no way we were able to use our nuclear weapons to defend ourselves from a radical group. But when you think about this you see the problem that only large-scale attacks from countries could be defended with nuclear weapons while the ones we are dealing with now (small-scale) are not well-defended with Nuclear Arms.

What Risks have they Posed to the World?
Nuclear weapons pose a very dark possibility to the world. One writer defends the fact that sixty or seventy nuclear weapons mounted on missiles could wipe out the largest or most populous countries in a matter of days. Seeing that there are around 10,000 nuclear weapons around, world-destruction is possible without even thinking of the after-effects of nukes. I think that the possible outcome of Nuclear war is too scary to go on with, especially with the amount of tension between countries with nuclear weapons. There aren't only the possibilities of purposeful detonations, but also accidental ones with the same catastrophic effects. With so many things that could go wrong we have no reason to continue to live under the stress of having these bombs around.

What Should the Outcome of the Nuclear Debate be? Leave them be, or work to Rid the World of them.
If a group of people were to accomplish the great task of getting all the countries to bring their nuclear weapons together to destroy them once and for all, it would be a miracle. With so much tension between countries it would be tough to get everyone to come together and give up their most powerful asset. It would just be easier to only regulate the control of Nuclear Weapons from a neutral organization. If we were able to limit everyone to an equal power level, and number of nukes, it would end any arms races, and keep everyone in check. If we were to just leave the Nuclear Situation how it stands, many countries would keep trying to produce better, bigger weapons and eventually something, an error might happen that could trigger a very dangerous war.


Future Research: Government Regulations and Technology