Nuclear Bombs

In many cases war is terrible, and often times people wonder if it is possible to limit the imminent danger of war. After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, many Americans were scared and angry. They believed that the United States government could have prevented the attack. We’re here to discuss how we would limited the imminent danger of war. First off, to limit the imminent danger of war, We would set a ban on nuclear bombs. The world has no use for nuclear bombs. Why do we need to bomb that can demolish a city? Nuclear bombs can level a city and make that area unlivable for many centuries. A nuclear bomb can not only destroy cities, but it can have a long lasting effect on generations to come. When a nuclear bomb is dropped, it leaves nuclear …show more content…
The Geneva Convention is the prohibition of the use of asphyxiating, poisonous, or other gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Most of the gases banned are colorless, tasteless, and even odorless. Why would you need a gas that can kill people without them knowing it’s there? One of the banned weapons is Sarin. Sarin is a colorless, odorless liquid, used as a chemical weapon. It’s considered a nerve agent and is lethal in small amounts. It is also considered a weapon of mass destruction. Why would any country ever use a weapon that the enemy can’t tell it is there? Another chemical weapon is Tabun. Tabun is clear, colorless, and tasteless liquid with a fruity odor. The effects of overexposure include “nervousness/restlessness, miosis (contraction of the pupil), rhinorrhea (runny nose), excessive salivation, dyspnea (difficulty in breathing due to bronchoconstriction/secretions), sweating, bradycardia (slow heartbeat), loss of consciousness, convulsions, flaccid paralysis, loss of bladder and bowel control, apnea (breathing stopped) and lung blisters” (Facts About Tabun, http://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/tabun/basics/facts.asp). As stated chemical weapons are a very bad tool that we