The A- Bomb was necessary because it saved the lives of countless American soldiers. The bomb droppings were not necessary if it was to showcase the full might and power of the United States to the USSR. However, I do not find enough support for the previous claim. War is destructive and deadly, so no matter the atomic bomb or a main land invasion, the end of World War II was going to be bloody. The ‘better’ choice, if you can call it that, was to drop the atomic bomb because is caused fewer deaths than invading the Japanese main land.
Period-7 Pros: If the Yucca Mountain is used as a nuclear waste depository then it will help store the large amount of nuclear waste that has been piling up in the nuclear power plants for many years. This build-up of nuclear waste poses a hazard to the areas that surround the power plants (such as New York City). The Yucca Mountain Depository resides is in a sparsely populated area and lies over 100 miles from the nearest city. Also the government already owns the land so it would be a waste if they did not use it for anything. The government has spent 10 billion dollars on the Yucca Mountain project already so it would be a waste to not use it, don’t we want our tax dollars to be well spent?
The last time the Federal Government has passed any law affecting fracking was in 1988, before many modern techniques have been adopted [ (Bergeron, 2011) ]. Fracking, although very beneficial and the best process of attaining natural gas, is just too dangerous. The U.S. government is still debating this controversial topic, and very likely will be for many months to come. Safety is very important to maintaining a strong and efficient country; the maintenance of this goal should not be difficult with government regulation of fracking locations. It is very simple - the United States Federal Government needs to take a good hard look at their current regulation on U.S. fracking locations for the safety of our American
We have even put web cams in them so if you do have to see that person or look at something then you can. This saves people time and money because of the less travel. We also have to. With the production of new medical supplies we are saving people lives and making them live longer. In chapter 2 it tells and shows a chart of how high are population has gotten over the years since the stone age to present day times.
What we don’t think about is the fact that most medical and quite a few technological advancements evolved because of war. Another fact is that, although it’s hard to believe, but war makes countries use their resources better, or at least find better ways to use them. Think about it, most countries try to win wars and to do that, you need to be better than the people that you are fighting, so we use our resources better. Another thing, without war, we might not have certain medical advancements at our disposal; such as penicillin, hydrogen peroxide, and antiseptics. Life would be a lot harder if these things had never been created, wouldn’t it?
It can be linked to other factors such as increased life expectancy and a decrease in birth rates that happened in the same time frame, which were also influential on the consequences of decreasing death rates. One of the reasons why death rates have decreased in the last 100 years or so is largely because of medical improvements that have been a consequence of technological advancements. These advancements in technology have allowed new treatments to be found to cure diseases that were previously incurable and deadly beforehand. This has also paved the way to new illnesses being discovered and cures being found for them, which also ties to medical improvements and the decrease in death rates. The introduction of the NHS in 1945 by the Labour government gave people, who previously were unable to access treatment for illnesses, free access to medical care when they needed it.
I do agree of dropping the bomb because it did save a lot of lives. Franklin Roosevelt was trying to find a way to end the war very fast. Then Truman had to end Roosevelt’s idea of winning the war fast. Truman wasn’t looking for a way to not use the atomic bomb. The United States wanted to end the war fast because we wanted the lowest amount of casualties.
Somewhere between 1,900,000 and 1,500,000 years ago is argued by scholars and historians alike to have been the first use of fire. It is proven to have been one of the most crucial things used by the early hominid Homo erectus in the evolution of man. Without fire, they couldn't cook their meat. There is more nutrition that's needed for brain development in cooked meat, making fire an important part of the history of man. The online dictionary "Merriam-Webster" defines fire as "the phenomenon of combustion manifested in light, flame, and heat."
America has spent numerous amounts of money on strengthening our homeland security as well as border patrol, which have strengthened our defense but weakened our economy. Although some Americans feel much safer within our borders today, there are still many more that still have fear of those terrorists, but with all the new laws stemming from 9/11 people generally feel much safer in America than ever before. In conclusion, 9/11 has had many a huge impact in America in many ways both positive and negative. A positive impact of 9/11 is that Americans came together as one and showed they were there for one another when times got hard. A negative impact that 9/11 has had is the effect it has had on the economy and also with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When medical breakthrough are made at the expense of an animal, is the happiness of those who can be cured greater than the suffering of the animal who underwent the experiments? Mill would seem to argue that the happiness of someone who has been cured would be longer lasting and better then the self gratifying happiness of an animal. Act utilitarianism would look at each instance of animal testing and determine if the consequences are better if the animal is tested on than if it were not. Finally, cost-benefit analysis would seem to agree with animal testing because innovations in medicine means money made and saved on health care. This would produce the most money and would be the better thing to do if the question is to test or