Dueling Opinions: Nuclear Disarmament

Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in 1945, the United States has developed an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons even more powerful than the original atom bomb. They are stored in various missile silos throughout much of the upper Midwest, and have the capability to reach and do irreparable harm to other nations in the event of their deployment. However, exactly how much damage one of these missiles is capable of delivering is top secret information to which only the highest ranking officials in our government are privy. It has been rumored that just one missile can destroy every living creature within a radius of a couple hundred miles. Scary stuff? You bet. It is because of this same fear that global wars like that of World War II have not happened since August of 1945.

The United States is no longer the sole carrier of these missiles. They are also handled by various European and Asian countries, most notably Russia. The fear of these weapons has been the cause of much protest from many people and groups worldwide. Some wish to see the U.S. lead the world in dismantling its nuclear arsenal. This makes me chuckle, as surely we'd be the only ones.

Leaders of major countries like the U.S., Russia, China and others are fully aware that a nuclear attack on any opposition also armed with nukes will not only ensure the destruction of that enemy, but also of themselves when the inevitable retaliation occurs. This Mutually Assured Destruction, or M.A.D., simply means that in the unlikely event that nuclear weapons were ever used, no one would win, but everyone would die. Can you think of a better deterrent for war? As hard as I've tried to, I cannot.

But let's humor, for a moment, those who believe that the dismantling of these weapons would actually be a cause for global peace. Let's say that there was a global dismantling of every nuke on earth today, and every country actually dismantled every single missile in its arsenals (this of course would never happen, regardless of promises made), but let's say it happened. Okay, great! No more nukes! But, wait a minute, isn't the knowledge already out there about how to make these things? As I recall, it wasn't until the ‘40s that the technology and knowledge of splitting uranium atoms had even existed. However, the uranium enrichment process has only grown simpler in the years following the cold war, and several of our enemies such as Iran and North Korea are too far along in the plans for our comfort. While the technology and knowledge of how to build these massive killing machines are out there, even if they are held by a few, no one is ever truly safe. This is just a logical fact.

A world without nuclear weapons would, indeed, be a safer place, but only if the lack of knowledge and technology came ancillary to that occurrence. Obviously, that simply is not the case in our world today, and to deny this is to be close-minded and irrational. Nuclear weapons have and continue to prevent wars, and are here to stay.