Nuclear Bomb Argumentative Essay

When the United States first developed the nuclear bomb it had secured its place as the most powerful nation in the world. There was no need for deterrence back then because nobody else had acquired nuclear bombs yet. Essentially the United States could get away with nuking anyone without any major consequences and without sending any ground troops. Only a few planes were needed to do the trick. It was only a matter of time before another state pursued the same technology and within a few years, the USSR had succeeded. Nuclear bombs became a power equalizer between the two nations. The game had changed now that there were two nuclear weapon states and fear of retaliation became a reason for deterrence. There was no possibility of trial and error with deterrence at the …show more content…
Obviously the president can’t be the only one who has the ability to use a nuclear bomb because if he/she were to be assassinated, who could successfully deter a nuclear war? So in that case you must give multiple people the ability to launch a nuke in case of an attack. There a few scenarios in which both the president and all of the known back ups are in the same room such as the state of the union address. So we can assume that there are even more people who have the ability to launch a nuke just in case an event such as the state of union were to be attacked. This is effective nuclear deterrence that is well thought out but what happens if one of these back ups to the president goes rouge? The results could be world ending. The next problem with the chain of command is the lower ranking military personnel are required to follow orders, even if the orders are irrational or morally corrupt. Of course following orders is effective in any organized group and is required in nuclear deterrence but refusing those orders could stop world