Eliminating Nuclear Weapons
Indeed, there is a valid reason for establishing the United States of America as one of the most powerful countries in the world in respect to armed struggles. Due to the significant capability of its military technology, America is recognized as a global superpower alongside other states such as Russia, Britain, and France. Even though there are few contemporary experiences to assert this fact ironically, history is rife with events and incidences that reveal the true yet cruel nature of America’s power in relation to the horrific consequences imposed on other states during an armed conflict. One such illustration involves the deployment of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. In an act of retribution against Japan for its actions against the Pearl Harbor and its opposition against the Allies, the United States, after developing its nuclear armory, managed to impose cataclysmic implications on the country in question. Presently, the United States together with other developed states have attained the appropriate technology required to create nuclear weapons. However, the abundance of such catastrophic weapons solely illustrates the extent to which most states have forgotten about the disastrous and horrific effects that arise from the deployment of the respective weaponry in relation to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The eradication of nuclear weaponry has progressed into an imperative humanitarian issue. Over the years, more civilians and institutions have been predisposed towards the investigation of nuclear-based sources and their implementation within areas such as the provision of clean energy and the reinforcement of security on a national security. In respect to the reinforcement of national security, nuclear weaponry has been posited as an effectual deterrent against armed assault since their development specifically at the start of the First World War. For instance, the attacks imposed on the state of Japan after the Pearl Harbor incidence succeeded in the eradication of any threats or assails that would be derived from the state during a critical period in the world’s history (Henshall 88). Nevertheless, it is difficult to ignore the disastrous nature of the effects that nuclear weaponry can cause. Using the aforementioned example, the application of atomic bombs in Japan caused wanton devastation of the cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, at the expense of thousands of innocent lives (Shrader-Frechette 232).
The stance against the use of nuclear weapons is based on the destructive effect they cause. In fact, calls for the abolishment of these arms are imperative since they are capable of implications such as the elimination of mass populaces, irreversible devastation, and the imposition of extensive expenses and costs on a nation or region. Undeniably, the destructive potential of nuclear weaponry was brought to light by the effects imposed on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki towards the culmination of the Second World War. Before this, professionals were participating in tests such as the Manhattan Project, which was one of the initial American studies that questioned the use of the weapon in question in relation to the supposed repercussions that it may cause (Murray 224). Irrespective of the division concerning the application of nuclear weaponry within a populated region, the explosion of atomic bombs within Japan ironically established an environment that was significantly credible to facilitate the occurrence of nuclear testing.
The inclination towards nuclear testing in connection to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings was derived from the destruction imposed on the cities in question following America’s deployment of the atomic bombs on the areas (Murray 226). Prior to the detonation of the bombs in the aforementioned cities, experts that engaged in the research of nuclear weaponry were already aware of the significant implications that would arise due to the application of such arms in a populated region. In accordance with the mechanics of a generic atomic bomb, the blast as well as the heat wave that was emitted from the application of the weaponry in question led to considerable damages in terms of civilian lives and infrastructure. In Hiroshima, the atomic bombing led to the destruction of nearly 50000 buildings (Martini 56). Aside from this, the bombing caused the death of more than 75000 persons over a rather short period. Additionally, the amount of devastation in the neighboring Nagasaki was considerable due to the deaths of 35000 people (Martini 58). Over 60 percent of the environment in the city in question was destroyed as well following the application of the bomb (Martini 77).
Because of the testing sequences carried out at the Nevada Test Site, individuals were exposed to significant radioactive fallout as an unintended consequence of the procedural sequences taking place at the time. The fallout, which was released at the site of nuclear impact, was disseminated across communities that were proximate to the test location. As an outcome, persons living in areas such as Arizona, Utah, and Nevada were affected by the radioactive fallout. Consequently, the fallout caused children as well as members of the communities that were affected to develop ailments such as leukemia (Doyle 16). Apart from this effect, individuals also displayed considerable degrees of cancer as well as thyroid-based diseases (Doyle 12). Indeed, the damaging implications posited by nuclear tests on personal health are significant based in examples offered by definite testing sites within the United States. The radioactive fallout that resulted from the test site at Nevada offers a pragmatic example of such effects.
At the turn of the early 1950s, persons that lived near the test site in question were persuaded to view the occurrence of the nuclear tests from the comfort of their living rooms and homesteads (Martini 26). Under the authorization of the Atomic Energy Commission, radiation badges were availed for the sole aim of recording field studies concerning the effects of possible nuclear fallout on a populace-based area. As an outcome, significant data was recorded in relation to the negative effects that the radioactive fallout imposed on inhabitants within and around the Nevada Test Site. For example, as an outcome of the persisting wind currents at the time, more than 6000 persons that were living in Utah were among those that attained health complications associated with lethal diseases such as cancer, especially leukemia (Martini 32). The widespread nature of the respective diseases established considerable studies regarding the factors that were responsible for the creation of a relationship between radioactive fallout and the causation of cancer-related diseases among individuals occupying the proximate fields.
Nevertheless, the opposition against nuclear weaponry does not solely concentrate on the utilization of the arms within population-based settings. Rather, it comprises the effects that are derived from the deployment of the respective weapons during sequences of testing (Doyle 18). As stated, the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki created a platform whose main aim involved evaluating the productivity, effectiveness, and explosive capabilities of nuclear weaponry irrespective of their plausibly unethical nature. Despite the supposed importance of nuclear tests, the exercise posits negative implications on the environment as well as inhabitants that occupy such settings. Firstly, procedures involved in nuclear testing, while evaluating effectiveness, normally expose the population to harmful and toxic gases that affect thousands of individuals negatively (Doyle 10). One example involves the testing exercises that were once performed at the Nevada Test location. Regardless of secure measures such as underground evaluations and the implementation of tall detonation towers, radioactive fallout from the respective exercises was inevitable.
Selection and Rationale for Sources
Generally, the resources that were applied within the respective study were imperative in reinforcing the main argument of the study. Accordingly, the essay focuses on the dangerous implications that are actually derived from the implementation of nuclear weaponry within a generic environment. While the argument may be appealing to the audience, it is impossible to assert the rationality behind it without the incorporation of pragmatic information sources. The implementation of both primary and secondary sources succeeds in establishing an objective and logical argument against the application of nuclear-based weaponry. For example, the inculcation of historical texts is significant in the provision of information that opens the opposing claim against the implementation of nuclear weapons in the contemporary setting. Through the historical texts, the essay is capable of integrating past incidences such as the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the state of Japan. One secondary text that was used in the respective argument involved Nuclear Weapons in World War 2 and the Nuclear Club by Philip Henshall, which offered significant historical information surrounding the use of nuclear weaponry during the occurrence of World War II. Accordingly, the utilization of the respective information in the essay reinforces the argument against the use and implementation of nuclear weaponry on an objective and rational basis. Apart from the respective text, other secondary sources of information were also utilized in the essay for the aim of establishing a scholarly opinion. In this instance, certain writings were used by authors versed in the study and effects of nuclear energy. Such examples involved the article, “Five Myths about Nuclear Energy”, by Kristin Shrader-Frechette and “Nuclear Power? Yes, Please” by Iain Murray, which rationally covered both sides of the argument in order to present a rational standpoint on the issues surrounding the application of nuclear weaponry.
The primary sources that have been applied in the essay mostly concentrate on the re-emphasis of the implications that arise from the application of nuclear weaponry. While secondary sources may cover the effects of the aforementioned arms from another perspective, they do not capture the actual incidence or event that took place as identified within the main claim of the essay. One illustration of this involves participation of the federal government in the testing and assessment of its nuclear weaponry on American soil. For instance, primary sources such as actual photographs were applied in order to capture the occurrence of nuclear testing as well as the effects that emanated from the respective exercises from the visual perspective of individuals proximate to the respective sites. Regarding this example, numerous secondary sources have provided significant information surrounding the event. For instance, educational texts such as Proving Grounds: Militarized Landscapes, Weapons Testing, and the Environmental Impact of U. S. Bases, by Edwin A. Martini offer an informative and objective account of the government’s participation in nuclear testing as well as other settings that were used in respect to the achievement of this objective. Additionally, peer-reviewed articles were also incorporated in order to advance the argument against the use and deployment of nuclear weaponry. For instance, the article, “Why Eliminate Nuclear Weapons?” by James E. Doyle, focuses on advocating for the eradication of nuclear weaponry based on the effects that were derived from the implementation of the respective arms during testing in various sites within the United States.
Doyle, James E. “Why Eliminate Nuclear Weapons?” Survival 55.1 (2013): 7-34. Print.
Henshall, Philip. Nuclear Weapons in World War 2 and the Nuclear Club. New York: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Martini, Edwin A. Proving Grounds: Militarized Landscapes, Weapons Testing, and the Environmental Impact of U. S. Bases. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2015. Print.
Murray, Iain. “Nuclear Power? Yes, Please.” Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Environmental Issues. Ed. Thomas Easton. Guilford: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2014. 224-230. Print.
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin. “Five Myths about Nuclear Energy.” Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Environmental Issues. Ed. Thomas Easton. Guilford: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2014. 231-236. Print.