The Issue behind dealing with the Threat of Nuclear Wars
Nuclear war is a very interesting topic. Everyone agrees that nuclear weapons are dangerous but the issue comes in with how to deal with a nuclear threat. Some debaters believe that nuclear weapons should be banned because humanity cannot survive a nuclear war. The sources I have found for these type of debaters are “Nuclear War: A Greater Threat than Ebola” and “How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb: Toward An Achievable Ban on the Testing of Nuclear Weapons”. Other arguers believe that nuclear weapons do not have to be banned because humanity can survive a nuclear war through shelter. The sources I have found for these types of arguers are “”Bomb Shelters & Fear of Nuclear War” and “Defense Against Fire Effects of Atomic Bombs”. There are also opponents who believe that nuclear weapons …show more content…
There are over 17,000 nuclear weapons. Millions of people will die from the immediate impact from a nuclear bomb and the human race would suffer from starvation. The effect on the planet’s climate would be catastrophic. The medical community is very important when the debate of a potential nuclear war starts to become a bigger issue. The medical community has a great influence on informing citizens that nuclear weapons should be banned. The medical community cannot support the hundred of millions of people that are injured from a nuclear war. The medical community could possibly lose most of their work force, as many employers would be killed from the explosions. There is also a history behind nuclear wars. The first nuclear, or atomic, bombs were deployed on Hiroshima. Even though nuclear weapons are clearly extremely destructive the government is still testing them. Mathew Landry believes that North Korea and Iran have the most potential to start using nuclear
Nuclear war is a very interesting topic. Everyone agrees that nuclear weapons are dangerous but the issue comes in with how to deal with a nuclear threat. Some debaters believe that nuclear weapons should be banned because humanity cannot survive a nuclear war. The sources I have found for these type of debaters are “Nuclear War: A Greater Threat than Ebola” and “How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb: Toward An Achievable Ban on the Testing of Nuclear Weapons”. Other arguers believe that nuclear weapons do not have to be banned because humanity can survive a nuclear war through shelter. The sources I have found for these types of arguers are “”Bomb Shelters & Fear of Nuclear War” and “Defense Against Fire Effects of Atomic Bombs”. There are also opponents who believe that nuclear weapons …show more content…
There are over 17,000 nuclear weapons. Millions of people will die from the immediate impact from a nuclear bomb and the human race would suffer from starvation. The effect on the planet’s climate would be catastrophic. The medical community is very important when the debate of a potential nuclear war starts to become a bigger issue. The medical community has a great influence on informing citizens that nuclear weapons should be banned. The medical community cannot support the hundred of millions of people that are injured from a nuclear war. The medical community could possibly lose most of their work force, as many employers would be killed from the explosions. There is also a history behind nuclear wars. The first nuclear, or atomic, bombs were deployed on Hiroshima. Even though nuclear weapons are clearly extremely destructive the government is still testing them. Mathew Landry believes that North Korea and Iran have the most potential to start using nuclear