All Nonfiction
- Bullying
- Books
- Academic
- Author Interviews
- Celebrity interviews
- College Articles
- College Essays
- Educator of the Year
- Heroes
- Interviews
- Memoir
- Personal Experience
- Sports
- Travel & Culture
All Opinions
- Bullying
- Current Events / Politics
- Discrimination
- Drugs / Alcohol / Smoking
- Entertainment / Celebrities
- Environment
- Love / Relationships
- Movies / Music / TV
- Pop Culture / Trends
- School / College
- Social Issues / Civics
- Spirituality / Religion
- Sports / Hobbies
All Hot Topics
- Bullying
- Community Service
- Environment
- Health
- Letters to the Editor
- Pride & Prejudice
- What Matters
- Back
Summer Guide
- Program Links
- Program Reviews
- Back
College Guide
- College Links
- College Reviews
- College Essays
- College Articles
- Back
Should Countries Have Nuclear Weapons?
The first time a nuclear weapon was introduced to the world was Hiroshima, the atomic bombing of it in World War II. From then on major powers, countries have developed nuclear weapons. Nowadays we live in a world where anything could happen, a possible rumor could pit a country against another and they could possibly use their most powerful weapon in their arsenal, nuclear weapons.
Many countries fear Russia because Russia holds the most nuclear warheads and if one country makes Russia mad, Russia would use their nuclear option and blow that country to bits. But what most people don’t realize is that it could possibly signal Armageddon. Other countries who possess nuclear weapons would see Russia as a major threat, and would use their nuclear weapons on Russia. The problem with that is, Russia can simply fire back at all those other countries that pose a threat. With the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, Putin uses nuclear weapons as a deterrent, meaning he is willing to do anything to win his war against Ukraine (Source 1).
Russia says they feel threatened by Finland joining NATO and will strengthen their military as a result (Source 3). Everyone in NATO reacts to threats made against a member. For instance, if Russia attacked Finland, America would retaliate, but then Russia's allies, like China, would do the same, with the assistance of other NATO members, potentially leading to many deaths. An event like this would be a domino effect and potentially cause armageddon, the end of the world as we know it.
The author from the New York Times shares his opinion and conflicts between other countries are bad for everyone such as the tension between North Korea and America (Source 2). It’s clear that the risks associated with nuclear weapons cannot be ignored. If there somehow was an accidental launch, terrorist attack, or miscommunication between countries it could lead to millions or even billions of deaths.
The choice to carry nuclear weapons must be made carefully weighing the advantages and disadvantages. Nuclear weapons may serve as a deterrent to potential attackers, but holding them clearly carries too many risks. Counties should think of disarmament of nuclear weapons instead of relying on nuclear power for security. Lives matter more than a conflict and should not be considered collateral damage in a war.
Similar Articles
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
This article has 0 comments.