The Pros And Cons Of Trident

Improved Essays
Trident is the UKs nuclear fleet, comprised of four submarines, equipped with ballistic missiles the have a range of 7,500 miles. The current missiles have the equivalent “killing power” of eight Hiroshima’s. The current generation of submarines will need replacing during the 2020s procuring a cost of £23.4bn; this figure will rise to around £100bn by the time decommission occurs forty years later. Do they serve any purpose?

Trident evolved from the Polaris submarine system, which was created to counter the nuclear threat posed by soviets during the cold war. Clearly this is no longer an issue however do they have any value in today’s world? The week claims “Nuclear weapons have guaranteed our security for generations. They remain the
…show more content…
Just imagine how much further humanity would be if nuclear weapons never came into being. Instead of the billions poured into weaponry, why not better humanity, feed the poor and make this planet just that much more bearable for the abused and downtrodden. In the unlikely event of a nuclear apocalypse only untold misery to millions of people would ensue, even today those who survived Hiroshima have their faces deformed and contorted. It is this, which advocates of nuclear weapons strive for the belittling of humanity? How can the nations of the world ever come into peace coexistence while nuclear weapons remain? It would indeed be a great loss, to see the human race, a race of such diversity and creativity disappear, due to the stupidity of a few. It is time for people to realise that nuclear weapons only seek to divide us and bring about untold misery. Do nuclear weapon show how far humanity has come, or shows how little we have learned? For humanity is still needlessly aggressive, it is time for use to realise these traits are obsolete, in a world, which could provide for everyone. It is time for humanity to grow up and work towards a future, which will set people free from constraints of coercive governments, who attempt to use nuclear weapons to control and to conform. Ultimately those who order the missiles to fire will not suffer as we will suffer, for they have nuclear bunkers in which to take shelter. By agreeing with the use of such weapons you are agreeing to be used as cannon fodder. It is time for people to realise this is all nuclear weapons and trident will ever achieve, untold misery. The first step towards a peaceful world free of constraints like governments and borders is to decommission of nuclear weapons worldwide, to help ensure the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Nuclear weapons have come into existence within the last decade. They have changed the way wars are fought as they could lead to the total extermination of humanity. These weapons can lead to mutual destruction of nations, which really have caused humans to reevaluate the way they conduct foreign affairs. Eric Schlosser’s article “Today’s nuclear dilemma” is about the nuclear weapons that countries control and what should be done with them. Schlosser argues that the current nuclear weapons active should be disarmed.…

    • 1248 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Nuclear weapons should be reduced because the threat of nuclear winter and even worse risks are too extreme. One of the scariest effects of nuclear weapons is nuclear winter. Nuclear winter is when smoke from nuclear explosions gets so dense that it blocks out the sun. This would block out all of the sunlight causing the earth to turn cold, gray, and dry causing plants and…

    • 296 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    That is why the International Court of Justice ruled in 1996 the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be contrary to the rules of international law. It is not a legitimate or ethical way to deal with international problems. Consequently, it is my belief that Trident is immoral and potentially genocidal. Each Trident warhead, of which there are 40 per submarine, is estimated to be able to kill over 1 million people outright. The vast majority of those killed would be civilians.…

    • 1118 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Either in the film or in the reality, the risks from nuclear weapons are too big and the use of these weapons is a threat to the humanity. Therefore, using nuclear weapons must be stopped…

    • 1978 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Another way of thinking is that every deadly product of technology has been utilized for destruction from machine guns to airplanes. In an article from Stanford University, it says, “History shows folly in hoping that each new amore destructive weapon will not be used. And yet we dare to hope that this time it will be different. We and the Soviets combined own over 50,000 nuclear weapons, equivalent to 6,000 World War II’s, capable of reaching targets in minutes, and able to wipe out every major city in the world” (Stanford University). This article shows how deadly nuclear weapons are, and with the history of deadly weapons, it is inevitable that society is destroyed by…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Affirmative Statement The current interventionist foreign policy that has driven the U.S. to accept an overwhelming amount of responsibility for maintaining the global order -- a commitment of such great magnitude that it should not be the burden of a single state, even a superpower such as the U.S. that “dominate[s] the world militarily, economically, and politically” (Posen 117). Emboldened by assumptions of American geopolitical strengths, the U.S. has pursued nation-building operations that serve as a detriment to both the federal budget and their international reputation. Instead, a return to the pre-WWII foreign policy of offshore balancing would reallocate resources from futile nation-building exercises towards preserving American dominance…

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Bill Perry

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages

    As it stated in the article, “unlike the original Cold War, this time there is a world of busy fanatics excited by the prospect of a planet with more bombs—people who have already demonstrated the desire to slaughter many thousands of people in an instant, and are zealously pursuing ever more deadly means to do so.” Along with that, people are not as prepared for a nuclear war to happen. I do realize that there is not much you can do if a bomb is dropped in the area you live in, but if everyone was given knowledge about them, it may be able to save some people in the surrounding areas. Many years ago, nuclear wars were a common topic of movies and people thought about the threat of them everyday, but that is the other difference from the times of the Cold War, “Americans no longer think about the threat everyday.” I thought this article was very interesting because I had never thought about how others may look at nuclear weapons, especially those that had experienced wars where these types of weapons were used in the past, like Bill…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The long-term dangers of radioactive fallout and environmental contamination potentially affect innocent people, allies, enemies, or even one’s own population. Hence, since the side effects of nuclear weapons can’t be measure or controlled, can’t be ever justifiable. The psychologist Eric Fromm supports part of this view by claiming that logic of the way that wars back in the day used to be, are not the same, nor hold for the same standards for modern nuclear wars. The pacifist position argues that the use of nuclear weapons will always be morally wrong because: “1) their use will result in widespread noncombatant deaths and 2) the destructive effects of such weapons will necessarily be out of proportion to any political or military objectives achieved” (p.208). Yet, there are some objections against the pacifist position.…

    • 1702 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some Actions are taking place today with Nuclear threats between the U.S. and North Korea. As Ms. Hanham said in an interview from Monterey California, “The frustration I have is borne out of how casually we've started to talk about [nuclear weapons] as tools”. This is a complete different time and due to advancements, people realize bombings are effective but it has been used to fright others since it’s such a powerful resource, if it’s ever needed. However, a terrible threat toward another country should be taken seriously. It was risky to use a bomb like this if other countries had something similar it could have made thing worse but this risk was beneficial and saved the war from an unknowing future, which would have most likely been…

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In our modern society, there exists this culture of fear that plagues all levels of society. This infection is believed by the masses to only be cured by the notion of security. Security, however, only prompts more fear. In effort to protect our ways of life, people justify various decisions and by these justifications, the commercialization of security is deemed acceptable and has become normalized. Professor Park posits that the Control need is the source of all evil.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A nuclear weapon is an explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission, in a fission bomb, or a combination of fission and fusion, like in a thermonuclear weapon. These weapons help make the world a more safe place, which is exactly why I believe that even though they are expensive, one Trillion Dollars over 30 years expensive, they are a necessary thing for today’s life. The production and use of nuclear weapons provide many jobs, help countries and nations be more or stay powerful, also make people not want to use them in a way. Nuclear weapons let countries maintain power or obtain power through military advantages. The weapons are weapons of mass destruction that nobody wants to mess with, causing other countries to respect the countries and nation that have these weapons.…

    • 565 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nuclear power provides clean, safe, and efficient energy, but a very similar negligence that resulted in the infamous Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire caused the malfunctioning of a nuclear reactor in Fukushima, Japan and resulted in the irradiation of entire cities, as opposed to the burning of a single building. Nuclear weapons punctuated the end of World War II with the bombing of Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, bringing unforeseen catastrophe and annihilation to an entire culture and acting as a testament to how war would be applied to the same amplifications the rest of the world were subjected to. Paying mind to this shift in magnitude eventually led to the M.A.D. policies of the Cold War, where nations participated in a familiar arms race applied to new nuclear powers, introducing the possibility of obliteration of all life on earth that remains present in every American mind to this…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mutually assured destruction prevented an outbreak of nuclear warfare during the Cold War. The stance against the employment of nuclear weapons arose from shifting norms in international society, as states were prompted to dedicate themselves to preventative war. Additionally, it was challenged whether the enormously devastating impact of nuclear weapons was ethically sound and whether it could be effectively used militarily. The notion that there was no winner to a nuclear war, however, predominately restricted states from resorting to nuclear warfare. The was no nuclear conflict in the Cold War because of mutually assured destruction.…

    • 1053 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We have concrete evidence that shows people simplifying and stripping away the humanity of the act of nuclear war. If the conversation is allowed to continue in this way, then the future will be extremely unpredictable, based more in either how our policy makers feel on that day or whether their pride feels at all threatened by the presence of other strong masculine players. Personally, I am made uncomfortable by this thought process, and while it is important to explore disagreeable situations we must also remind ourselves of what lies at the core of the diluted vocabulary. Specifically, in the affairs discussed in the authors article it is vital that we constantly remind ourselves what the new language translates to, and that taking away emotion from the words does not take away the pain someone can…

    • 1011 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    “You and The Atomic Bomb” They say, I say George Orwell, an English novelist and essayist, wrote “You and The Atomic Bomb” on October 19, 1945. Roughly about 2 months before this essay, bombs were dropped over Hiroshima not only letting the world know who has power and who doesn’t, but also leading individuals to be oppressed. With the discovery of the atomic bomb, and the difficulty and cost of developing it, the world will simply continue on a path of destruction and will eventually separate into dominating powers. It has been common to dismiss the danger of weapons, especially if it doesn’t directly affect you. The American society doesn’t take into consideration the danger of developing new weapons because, as they say, it is not them who fear it, it is them who use it as a threat.…

    • 1220 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays