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

"The possession of nuclear weapons can never be justified." Discuss.

Extracts from this document...


Z�e Terry 13TFI "The possession of nuclear weapons can never be justified." Discuss. Nuclear Weapons, explosive devices, designed to release nuclear energy on a large scale, used primarily in military applications. Nuclear weapons have been in existence since the Second World War, but it's only up and till recently that the fear of them has grown. To discuss this statement fully it is important to first define three mayor terms; 'possession', 'nuclear' and 'weapons'. 'Possession' - according to the Oxford dictionary means to own or to have something belongs to you, in this case, nuclear weapons. 'Nuclear' - means, 'a mass of energy which when released or absorbed causes reactions.' 'Weapons' -means, 'thing designed or used for inflicting harm or damage.' For years countries have used their military capabilities to improve their power status, but should countries be limited to what they are allowed to possess? History has shown us the devasting effects of nuclear warfare, such as the atomic bomb exploded by the United States over Hiroshima, that killed thousands of people, not only by the impact of the bomb but also by the air pollution that continued after the attack. ...read more.


As nuclear weapons have only been around approx. 60 years, it is hard to say whether these thinkers would have the same opinion on nuclear warfare as they did on one-on-one combat as in my opinion the latter requires a lot more courage and stamina. Next there is the matter of when should a fight be fought - conditions for 'jus ad bellum'. In some cases possession and possibly use of nuclear weapons could be a good thing as for example, if your opponent country has them then they can no longer use them as a threat, also Christian realism argues that human communities have to use force to maintain a just and ordered society, does this include scarifying innocent people though for the greater good? Today, with the war in Iraq, some extremist American groups have sent petitions to Congress in hope to begin nuclear warfare against Iraq, based on the destruction caused by the 9/11 incident. But, who has the right to say whether a country should launch such a devasting attack on another country where undoubtedly many thousands on innocent people will die. ...read more.


While a realist Christian would say that if war serves the national interest then it is acceptable, others say, such as pacifist Christians, that war is unconditionally unacceptable and so are all weapons involved in war. But even so, we can relate the topic of nuclear war back to the Bible. Nuclear weapons are capable of wiping out large amounts of space at once; the same can be said of the flood that God caused to cleanse his world of evil, where he only saved a few, in Genesis 6-9. But this time, it's not God destroying the world, it's a select few, who let their countries suffer the consequences of their actions. Personally, I believe that the amount of nuclear warheads needs to be reduced globally, but if they are going to exist then countries should all have them to act as a deterrent for war. There should be a league, such as the League of Nations, that could objectively decide on what strengths and amounts each country should have instead of giving this power to one country, especially when religious beliefs are as ever, being used to cause and used as excuses for war. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...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. Does Realism as a statist Ideology exist today?

    goes back to the idea that each state is in competition which each other. For any state, national interest comprises of the general need of survival, economic growth and security of the nation. Due to these goals in mind each states ultimately ends up competing against each other, and therefore resulting in hostility and mistrust being created amongst them.

  2. International Relations Assess the arguments for and against the proliferation of nuclear weapons

    reasons, advocate the widening of NW holding/ownership for means of deterrence.14 A Case against Nuclear Weapons. Checks and Balances Beginning with Scott Sagan presents his "alternative theory of the consequences of nuclear proliferation...rooted in organisational theory."15 Sagan presents two arguments fundamental to his theory.

  1. You Will Never Be Forgotten

    They announced a nationwide design contest for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The prerequisite for the design was that all 57,661 names of the dead or missing must be listed on the memorial. In the fall of 1980, Maya Lin was a 21-year-old undergraduate majoring in architecture at Yale University.

  2. History of the United States

    New ideas, however, continued to inundate the country, and optimism remained high. The U.S. population delighted in the "miracles" that new inventions had brought them--electric lights, airplanes, new communication systems. The solo flight to Paris of Charles LINDBERGH in 1927 seemed to capture the spirit of the age.

  1. WWII Atomic Weapons Were Justified

    They believed that they were direct decedents from God. Every one else to them was of a lesser-being. This left the United States in a situation where the atomic bomb would be the best option to pursue. Combine the beliefs of the Japanese and with their power they were still

  2. Do nuclear weapons have any use as instruments of deterrence or are they just ...

    removing missile basis from Cuba and America removing nuclear missiles from the border of Hungry, In order to stop the world coming so close to nuclear war again a direct line of communication was also set up between Washington and Moscow in an attempt to avoid positions where the two were faced 'eyeball to eyeball'.

  1. The purpose of my examination of war is to question whether the resort to ...

    According to the legalist paradigm and its self determination argument, the crime of aggression lies in breach of sovereignty because breaching sovereignty violates individuals human rights. Suffice to say, not only does principle of non-intervention and non aggression apply to external endeavours by one sovereignty into another defined sovereignty but

  2. US President George Bush labelled Iran and Iraq as part of an "axis of ...

    A CIA report to the US Congress states that Iran has manufactured and stockpiled chemical weapons such as blister, blood, choking weapons. The report also stated that during the first half of 2001, Iran attempted to buy 'production technology, training, expertise, equipment and chemicals from Russia and China 27 Shortly

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