what were the cons of making the atomic bomb?
I'm doing this paper on the cons of the atomic bomb. So far I got the environmental effects, the effects on what it did to the people of Japan, and the wars it caused like the cold war and Cuban missile crisis. Can anyone help me out by giving me some more info on how it effects the present day? Could i write how its effecting North and south Korea? Any help would be appreciated thanks!
November 19, 2014
6 Comments • Newest first
You can definitely write about the war in Korea. The Korean War was between the North, which was occupied by the USSR after Japan was declared war on in World War II, spreading communism, dictatorship and whatever, while the capitalist democracy was spread to the South occupied by the United States. The nuclear weapons were a source of major tension between the USSR and America, and led to the arms race between them, so you could easily justify the Korean War/North South split of Korea as a result of the rising tensions between the two nations, and that the Korean War was a proxy war between the two nations.
[quote=WiziLiCe]Maybe there may NEED to be some catastrophe in the first place.
Would it really be more negative than positive that more than 2/3's of the population gets wiped out?
Can't and hasn't history taught us over and over what magnificence war bring upon the "evolution" of knowledge.
Forget about all the politically-correct answers that "killing people is wrong" and then think deeply about it.[/quote]
some people would argue that plagues which killed a large number of people, such as the bubonic plague, were needed and a gods send. We all know, we have reached a stage where population is out of control compared to the available resources.
[quote=Chema]The cold war is not a cons, it is a pro
Thanks to nuclear weaponry many wars have been prevented and several don't go beyond the so-called "cold war" label
You think humans have evolved into a more stable species since WW2?
As IF, it is nuclear weaponry the thing that has protected us from our own idioticy by passively triggering what makes us morons in the first place, our irrational fear, to avoid death by killing the unknown[/quote]
Maybe there may NEED to be some catastrophe in the first place.
Would it really be more negative than positive that more than 2/3's of the population gets wiped out?
Can't and hasn't history taught us over and over what magnificence war bring upon the "evolution" of knowledge.
Forget about all the politically-correct answers that "killing people is wrong" and then think deeply about it.
Thanks to Nuclear Weapon we prevented WW3, but Nuclear weapons Also could have started WW3.
During the Cold war era.
But if you really want to know, do some googling on Manhattan project, i also doing a paper on this
The cold war is not a cons, it is a pro
Thanks to nuclear weaponry many wars have been prevented and several don't go beyond the so-called "cold war" label
You think humans have evolved into a more stable species since WW2?
As IF, it is nuclear weaponry the thing that has protected us from our own idioticy by passively triggering what makes us morons in the first place, our irrational fear, to avoid death by killing the unknown
you could write about the side effects that victims still experience
you can also say how it advanced technology, but in a bad way
you can write how that event paved the road for more problems to occur