• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Even if conventional warfare is acceptable for Christians, nuclear war could never be

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

'Even in conventional warfare is it acceptable for Christians, nuclear war could never be; Part 3 Until the 14th century technology played a limited role in warfare. Before then weapons were little more than used for hunting or tools spears, arrows and swords were put to different use Weapons have become part of modern society and are needed for many things such as protection. The real break through came with the invention of gunpowder by the Chinese. Major changes occurred in the 19th Century, in the 1830's the mechanism of the gun was totally changed making it quicker to load and shot. Man quickly sped up the inventing of weapons both automatic as seen in the use of tanks in world war 1 and Nuclear as seen in World War 2. ...read more.

Middle

Many Christians believe that supreme powers like Britain and America have avoided major war as they have colossal nuclear abilities. Many countries justify their nuclear programs by stating it is for defence and not for aggressiveness. On the contrary many Christians dispute that weapons of carnage cannot be used in a restricted means it's all or nothing. Many say that the destruction produced would be so great that no one could justify it. Many individuals argue that it would be morally wrong to use nuclear weapons since the complete human population could be wiped out in a few hours. If a nuclear war were to commence there would be no survivors and it would leave many parts of the world unfit for human habitation. ...read more.

Conclusion

It would appear that there are more argument hostile to the use of nuclear weapons, as a Christian I judge the use of nuclear arms as being unethical and as a waste of money. Millions of pounds of tax payers money each spent on military exercises that are used to practice fighting and aren't even real wars, yet they spend money on these ridiculous things. If we think sensibly war kills yet governments are allowed to overspend money on weapons. When we could be giving this money to people who need it and instead of killing people and destroying lives we can save lives and make lives a little more easier. I see nuclear war as having no real winners. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Should Britain eliminate its nuclear arsenal?

    Probabilistic conception of causality is that inevitably nuclear war will occur in the future, thus global abolition would significantly reduce this probability to virtually zero. Jonathan Schell's book 'The Abolition' gives a first class diagnosis of the nuclear predicament. Many theorists, such as Quinlan, fear global disarmament because of the potential crisis occurrence of a dangerous and volatile re-armament race.

  2. You Will Never Be Forgotten

    Confident her design would not win she submitted her design nonetheless. ("Maya Lin: A Strong Clear Vision") Maya Lin's design depicted a V-shaped 200 footwall that rests 10 feet below the normal grade of the land. The wall was made of polished black granite and the two arms of the V point toward the Lincoln Memorial and Washington Monument.

  1. "Even if Conventional war is acceptable for Christians, nuclear war could never be" Do ...

    These figures shows how if conventional wars are acceptable to Christians then nuclear war is no different since both produce the same results on lives of people. Another reason why both wars are acceptable to Christians because it's the government's decision and according to Romans 13:1-7 from the bible, we

  2. "War in the Modern World includes terrorism and the threat of Nuclear War. How ...

    "The war must be fought fairly. The amount of force used should only be enough to succeed. There must be no unnecessary cruelty or deliberate violence." This is the most controversial of the conditions as this has been broken at least 200 times in the last century.

  1. The Prelude to the 1975 War and the Cairo Agreement.

    and it was agreed to delegated Gemayel to approach the Americans for revision of the 17 May pact, to make it a purely military arrangement. On 13 November, at a critical time for Syria in dealing with both Arafat and Gemayel, Hafiz al-Asad suffered a heart attack, precipitating a leadership crisis in Damascus.

  2. Explain the different Christian attitudes to warfare.

    Like St Thomas Aquinas for example. He came up with the just war criteria. These were. The war must be proportionate. It must be a last resort. No innocent civilians can be killed. It must be controlled by a sovereign or authority of state. There must be a just cause.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work