Nuclear Warfare: Stockpiling Destruction

Nuclear Warfare: Stockpiling Destruction

            Ever since their creation in the 1940’s, nuclear weapons have been proven to have the capacity to deliver massive damage and death in seconds. The world can attest to their awful power firsthand through the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the Second World War. Over the years, nuclear technology in weaponry has evolved as scientists continue to push chaos’s boundaries. Today, nuclear bombs can wreak havoc on entire countries, entire continents, not just cities. The potential for a devastating event the likes the world has never seen could occur with the slightest push. Even then, world leaders like Roosevelt and Churchill were pushing to ensure that the destruction unleashed upon Japan would never again come to fruition at any time in the future and despite close calls, it has not. Nuclear weapons must be exterminated throughout the globe in order to achieve true peace and to ensure that the horror the world experienced in the past is never repeated.

            Many are still those opposed however, to eliminating such dangerous and harmful weapons. Why would anyone want to see continued nuclear weapon proliferation and creation, knowing the danger they possess? David G. Gompert, vice president of the Rand Foundation in Santa Monica, California and director of the National Security Research Division brings up interesting points surrounding nuclear weaponry and its tremendous influence on the world. Gompert argues that, in the United States security system, the country’s large nuclear stockpile does not pose a threat to national and worldwide security, but in fact deters violence. While he agrees that the US should attempt to diminish the importance and attractiveness in nuclear weaponry, he believes that the weapons must remain for possible retaliation purposes and to elicit fear in other nations that would seek to deploy weapons of mass destruction. He states that the most prevalent threat to any nation that could warrant a retaliatory nuclear strike results from the release of biochemicals, such as anthrax, on a large scale. In addition, Gompert stresses the importance on deterrence for situations regarding chemical warfare and insists that through intimidation, nations could halt chemical warfare in its entirety. Nuclear weapons would serve as the intimidating factor.

            Now while nuclear weapons may serve as a consequence for unleashing weapons of mass destruction in society today, their presence alone is causing an arms race that will cycle onwards, raising tension between nations. Even today, nations like North Korea and Iran, who have ignored the nuclear treaties set forward by the world, have the means, the technology, and the resources to not only construct nuclear weapons, but to use them. By enforcing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and increasing vigilance on stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction and taking an active role in eliminating already created nuclear weapons, dangerous situations, like in Iran and North Korea, would be stopped and inter-country tensions would lessen, bringing about global peace and trust. Throughout history, presidents and world leaders worldwide have opposed nuclear weapon development, dating back to Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” address in 1953. Even military leaders like Eisenhower, crucial in the decision to bomb Japan, recognized and regretted nuclear power and its effect on the war. Both Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev opposed nuclear weapons entirely, citing them as good for nothing weapons that could bring about human extinction.

            Perhaps the single most important contribution to nuclear weapon elimination, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was implemented in 1970 after being proposed by Ireland and Finland, and has stood as the benchmark for nuclear arms control to this day. In its three pillars, the treaty states that the nations practice the non-proliferation and disarmament of nuclear weapons while still possessing the right to research and use nuclear technology regarding other societal aspects. Today, the NPT houses 189 nations worldwide, five of which possess nuclear weaponry, including the United States, France, Russia, China, and the United Kingdom. North Korea, India, Israel, and Pakistan have either withdrawn from the treaty or did not sign, respectively. Just the fact that 189 nations worldwide are committed to nuclear weapon disposal justifies the danger that nuclear weapons emit. By abiding by the treaty, nations are agreeing to stop nuclear weapon construction, not spread or share nuclear weapons with others countries, and destroy dormant weapons created in the past. In addition, uranium and other nuclear energy sources that were used to power once active warheads have, in many cases, been used to instead in nuclear energy research and use. So, through the elimination of warheads, nuclear technology could increase, allowing society to use another energy resource. Overall, nuclear disarmament would reduce the likelihood of nuclear war, whether accidental or intentional and would aim to prevent the possible deaths of thousands or millions that could come about from a nuclear war.

            In popular culture and many other life aspects, a possible nuclear war occurrence frightens most. Nuclear weapons possess the power to destroy countless lives, countries, and even the Earth’s very biosphere and without continued efforts to stem its spread and creation, society will be reminded of the dangers it possesses. By eliminating weapons, society would never have to fear annihilation from nuclear war and would benefit scientifically and technologically from the implementation of nuclear energy to more prudent and necessary fields. Nuclear weapons must be eliminated for the dangers they pose to the society’s safety and the possible ramifications of their use.

Works Cited

"The United States Should Aggressively Promote Nuclear Disarmament." Nuclear             Weapons. Ed. Louise I. Gerdes. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. At Issue. Gale             Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 29 Oct. 2010.

Gompert, David G. "Nuclear Deterrence Can Prevent Biological Warfare." Biological             Warfare. Ed. William Dudley. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing             Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 29 Oct.

"Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) | Arms Control Association." Arms Control             Association | The Authoritative Source on Arms Control since 1971. Web. 30 Oct.             2010. <http://www.armscontrol.org/documents/npt>.

Perfection, Framed

I have never known a place as strikingly beautiful as the A-Frame cabin, just below tree line on Barr Trail. Crystal clear, cool water from Cabin Creek flows directly through the site, splitting it and giving the surrounding area a healthy green vitality. I remember dipping my hands into this ice-cold stream, enjoying the numbing sensation in my cuticles as I lifted the pure refreshment to my lips. It tasted so clean, pure, and even welcoming. Sweet smelling flowers bloom from in between boulder crevices, and tall, itchy grasses line the valley’s sides. The foliage is magnificent, a colorful blend featuring purples, whites, green hues, and fiery reds. Above, massive sharp-edged rocks protrude over the cliff sides, casting menacing shadows onto the cabin’s roof. Far below, two shimmering reservoirs highlight the land’s ever changing characteristics as the sun reflects off their glassy surfaces. I always find it amazing how quickly the dramatic landscape can evolve. Just by turning three hundred sixty degrees, I can see flourishing vegetation, charred forests, breathtaking lakes, tremendous rock formations, and even glossy, snow-covered tundra. This area is so unique that the sheer beauty of it is almost overwhelming and despite the fact I’ve only been there twice, it remains in my mind, attesting to its perfection. Nowhere else can I find such a powerful geographic display, a display showing such a wide variety of distinctive topographic features that will forever embody nature’s true diversity and tranquility.

Language Invasion

Language Invaders

            “A man to be converted has to give up his will, his ways, and his thoughts. You cannot find, I believe, a case in the Bible where a man is converted without God’s calling in some human agency – using some human instrument.” Dwight Lyman Moody’s quotes exemplify the power a stronger culture can have on another culture, often resulting in the weaker culture’s submission to the practices and beliefs used by that stronger group. When a pushier language and culture encounters and dominates a lesser culture, that smaller culture adopts religion, language and other cultural aspects that often create divisions between the groups that could result in violence, death, and differences resulting in the weaker culture’s submission. The opposing cultures can combine through religion, language, and culture and the effects that their introductions bring about.

            When an established, stronger religion reveals itself to a weak culture, a culture that eager to experience others, the already superior religion tends to overshadow the beliefs held by the less superior. In the movie Hawaii, the Reverend Hale introduces the inhabitants on Oahu to Christianity and the idea that one God exists who contains immeasurable power. To the natives, who have practiced their own polytheistic religion for years, the idea sounds important. They see the white people as superior because they possess ships, money, and bring exotic items to the islands, therefore associating their beliefs, religion, and culture with power, power that they also wish to attain. Over time, Hale builds a church on Oahu and teaches its inhabitants about the new God, while ushering out the old traditions with distaste and vengeance. He destroys the idol’s temple and baptizes Oahu’s leaders, resulting in the acceptance of his own religion. Through this mass conversion, the Hawaiian people forget their old ways, losing cultural information to the power that Christianity presents while, at the same time, becoming more and more accustomed to the Christian practices. Soon, the very Hawaiian religion either vanishes altogether or becomes so smothered by Christianity that their remaining value system begins to crumble. The natives submit to a higher and more forceful religious entity.

            Language plays a vital role in a culture’s submission to a more dynamic force. After seeing the success and wealth that Christians and English speakers have, the Hawaiians attribute this to language. As the languages blend from dual usage, both cultures adopt aspects from each other’s languages. For example, English has many new words that are borrowed from other countries through exposure, like pineapple, French words surrounding medicine and warfare, or even Native American words like prairie or raccoon. However, the more dominant language carries more meaning in both cultures. Upon greeting the English missionaries, the leader demanded to be taught how to write and speak English at once. After learning, she then transferred this information to her subjects who in turn adopted it for their own, seeing it as a necessity for life. Eventually, the entire town spoke, wrote, and presented ideas in English, abandoning their first Hawaiian language. Just like their religion, the language fades into non-use and the Hawaiians again submit to a more prevalent means for communication, disregarding their own as unworthy or inferior.

            Culture, a people’s sole representation, also fails through constant conflicts between the two groups and belief adoption. When Reverend Hale first learned that the Hawaiians had sex with their own siblings or others without marriage, killed impure or deformed babies, committed adultery, and worshiped multiple Gods representing different natural aspects, he condemned the “violent savages” to Hell because he could not understand their opposing beliefs. Over time, his own beliefs, originating from a supposed higher and more powerful source, overturned the beliefs the Hawaiians held. Laws were created banning these abnormal actions and presented in English first to the people. Hale interrupted Hawaiian ceremonies and rejected teaching Hawaiian history that did not correspond with the English culture. Due to English’s increased presence on the island and the continued emphasis on Christianity, the English language, and the Hawaiian culture’s banishment, the natives had no choice but to embrace English customs as their own. The people recognized the prosperity that the white people honed and attributed it to the English customs. La Haina, over a few years, changed from an ocean side village to a bustling port. Everything from the Hawaiian’s language to their dress had changed to meet the English customs. Previously naked girls now wore dresses and men donned suits. The town boasted an infirmary, town store, sugar cane plantations, merchant shops, and even a hotel, buildings identical to an American town. However, as the English presence on the island grew, the Hawaiian presence petered out. A measles outbreak, brought to the island by travelers and merchants, devastated the Hawaiian people who had never encountered such a disease. They died in large numbers while the English stayed healthy. English businessmen bought Hawaiian land and built plantations to harvest sugar cane, often using Hawaiian labor. Rather than embracing the converted, they stole their land and used them to succeed, disregarding the native’s needs.

            As the weaker culture submits to the language, practices, and religion indicative to a pushier culture, divisions arise that result in disruption, death, and differences. The more established religion overpowers the weaker religion, resulting in acceptance to different beliefs not consistent with the previous ones. Languages change and are often replaced with a more recognized language belonging to a more powerful cultural group. Entire cultures and beliefs convert, resulting in massive and far-reaching changes that affect an entire community, exposing them to a foreign and unfamiliar value set. In closing, Dwight Lyman Moody’s words stand true. For with help from others, voluntary or not, a man or a culture has to give up his will to remain true to his history, his ways, and his very thoughts to accept another culture. In history, these cultures tend to submit to stronger wills and language groups.

Works Cited

 Hawaii. Dir. George Roy Hill. Perf. Julie Andrews and Max Von Sydow. Metro Goldwyn Mayer, 1966. DVD.

 Moody, Dwight L. "Famous Quotes about Conversion." Book of Famous Quotes - The One Stop for Quotations Lovers. Web. 18 Oct. 2010.