Isabella Esposito Doctor Young H6SX 4/16/12 The Atomic Bomb: A True Necessity In 1945, President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb against Japan in an attempt to end World War II. It brought an almost immediate end to the war and hypothetically saved thousands of lives. Without the atomic bombs, the Japanese leaders might have dragged the war out, refusing to surrender. Moreover, the bombings could be seen as falling in line with the concept of “total war.” The decision by the United States to drop atomic bombs on Japan was justifiable based on three factors: the desire to save American and Japanese lives, to end World War II quickly, and to demonstrate the power of the US military. Harry Truman,
He also points out the fact that people should focus on the present consumption of energy, rather than the future for energy conservation. Nader said that people should start conserving energy right now, such as not using electricity when it is not needed. Shellenberger has the argument other alternative energies such as coal cause over 3000 deaths. As the demand for energy increases with revolutionized technology, Shellenberger believes that nuclear energy would be much better compared to other alternative energies. Nader comes back with the fact that we should focus on conserving the alternative use of energies given to us today and not to create power plants that have additional risks caused by nuclear energy.
Darien Sorensen Professor Potratz English 100 9 October 2009 Rhetorical Analysis on “Better Energy” Gwyneth Cravens addresses the issue of the use of nuclear energy in her article “Better Energy”. She starts off by introducing James Lovelock, who is a prominent figure in the green movement, but four years before she wrote her article, he upset his fans by endorsing the use of nuclear energy. She goes on to explain how the use of nuclear energy will be able to decrease the threat of global warming. She claims that nuclear energy is the only way to get the amount of energy that is needed, without critically hurting the environment. Through out her article Cravens highlights the environmental benefits of nuclear energy.
Knowing this, other countries will try to avoid total destruction instead of starting a nuclear war. Eisenhower’s nuclear deterrent policy may very well have prevented war between the United States and Soviet Russia during the Cold War. Later on in Dwight’s career he worked toward nuclear prevention (DeGegorio 244). Nuclear prevention is the act of preventing potentially dangerous and volatile countries and organizations from acquiring nuclear weapons (244). This is used today, for example the attempts to stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.
And also to make the situation better which USA had big nuclear bases and land on West Germany and Turkey. He had make a really clever decision to make USSR better through the struggle between each other. He make a proposal on source D to Kennedy. To said that they would be willing to remove the nuclear sort of weapons on Cuba if the USA would remove these kind of harmful weapons on Turkey as
An immediate consequence would be anger from people who believe that the atomic bomb was the right thing to do. If the atomic bomb were not dropped, there is a possibility that an event to that nature could have happened on U.S. soil. Long-term consequences could have been a better relationship with the Japanese as well as a clear
The United States didn’t want that to happen so they could end the war fast. That’s when we had no other options to end war except using the Atomic
The Atomic Energy Act stated how the United States government would manage nuclear technology. The Atomic Energy Act also determined that the nuclear weapon programs would be held under civilian, not military jurisdiction. Another treaty, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), was organized to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and/or the peaceable use of them. Virtually every country in the world has signed this agreement (excluding India, N. Korea, S. Sudan, Pakistan and Israel) which was opened for signatures in 1968. Preventive measures have been taken to assure the safety of the human race against nuclear technology.
The Republican platform identifies two key components to facing the threat of nuclear weaponry, reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation. However, the Republican platform does not dare envision a world without nuclear weapons. Instead, the platform maintains that the US must develop and deploy national and theater missile defenses to protect the US and its allies. The Democratic Platform, however, offers a more idealistic approach to nuclear proliferation and advocates for a nuclear policy that aims to eliminate all nuclear weaponry from the face of the Earth. The Democratic Platform also addresses the combined threat of Iran and North Korea obtaining nuclear weaponry and how they would attempt to combat such a threat.
Back when the “Duck and Cover” film came out the government was limited to what they could do to prevent a nuclear war. They were limited on what systems they had that would help notify when a nuclear war was about to take place. Now technology is so advanced that we would be aware of things like that and are a lot more conscious of any upcoming attacks. I’m not saying it’s impossible for terrorism to happen, but I am saying that we have a lot of highly updated technology that helps us feel safer in case of any terrorism attacks that were to occur, unlike decades