Iran’s nuclear program is very controversial and has been even more controversial ever since they started enriching their uranium that can be potentially become a nuclear weapon. This gives the west and Israel a reason to be more concerned about the issue. However in all of this there is a revelation recently because Iran and the P 5 +1 have reach a nuclear deal in order to loosen the harsh sanctions they have received resulting in billions of dollars back to the Iranians in return for shutting down the program for half a year. However if this diplomacy fails then it is time for deterrence to go into play here and possible military action. There are other nations that have nuclear weapons like India and Pakistan without a permission slip. So all in all it seems to be unfair that Iran is being discriminated in all of this but there are distinct differences between Iran and Pakistan or even India. Now some political scientists believe that Iran sovereignty is being violated if they have to sign a permission slip to legitimize their nuclear program according the IAEA. This would have been a good argument if Iran didn’t accept the deal. But Iran did and they consent to the UN that when the parts deal requires the Iranians to reduce their purity on their uranium to a lower percentage where it is suited for nuclear power only to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. So in terms of a nuclear program the Iranians already accepted to do this directly or indirectly even though it is only temporary arrangement. It is because they accepted the conditions laid out until a more formal deal is done that they all can agree upon. This basically means this doesn’t affect their sovereignty in the least so that argument is irrelevant at this point assuming Iran commits to the deal in that six-month time period. They accepted the terms of the and because they are allowed to keep the uranium to that level only instead of dismantling the nuclear program completely is essentially them getting that permission slip regardless if there was a challenge to sovereignty or not
This issue on the table about Iran’s nuclear weapons have been around for many years without a bulge from both sides of in the international arena for decades. The west are partially concerned about this because they have uranium that enriched that can be turned into a weapon of mass destruction.
Nuclear weapons are a problem that the world is facing today as countries want to have their
Eric Schollser argues in his paper “Today’s Nuclear Dilemma,” that the nuclear weapons in the world, and the issues that they are associated with, should be of major concern to today’s society. Nuclear Weapons were of world wide concern during the time of the Cold War. These weapons, and their ability to cause colossal devastation, brought nightmares into reality as the threat of nuclear war was a serious and imminent issue. The US and Russia both built up their inventories of these pieces of artillery, along with the rest of their arsenals, in an attempt to overpower the other. This past terror has become a renewed concern because many of the countries with these nuclear weapons in their control have started to update their collections. One
The chosen article for critical review is the Nuclear-Armed Iran: A Difficult but Not Impossible Policy Problem by Barry R. Posen. The author of the article is a Professor of Political Science at MIT who serves as the Director of the MIT Security Studies Program and on top of that accomplishment, he has written two previous works, Inadvertent Escalation: Conventional War and Nuclear Risks and The Sources of the Military Doctrine. Barry Posen contributes an extensive amount of knowledge on the subject of nuclear weapons. Posen is well versed in the field of Political Science furthermore he is represented at a very respectable university, and his previous works regarding nuclear arms displays that he is knowledge on the topic (MIT Political Science). Over the years, there have been consistent debates, but lack of development and action on how to progress against the possible productions of nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranians. This pessimistic view is not without proper concern because the leader of Iran, president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been recorded saying, 'death to Israel' so skeptics and general people alike share much concern with the development of nuclear energy in Iran. The technology would grant the opportunity to construct nuclear weapons. Which some may fear it can be used against neighbouring states in the Middle East. The state in danger of course is Israel, one of the cooperative Middle Eastern states that essentially acts in the interests of the western world, something Ahmadinejad accused them of doing, saying this is why both the UN and the United States are 'pro-israel' (YouTube Israel Off the Map). In this analysis, there may be a presence of realist biased.
Mutual Assured Destruction. Nuclear holocaust. The destruction of whole nations in the blink of an eye. We cannot hide from the threat that nuclear weapons pose to humanity and all life. These are not ordinary weapons, but instruments of mass annihilation that could destroy civilization and end all life on Earth. Nuclear weapons are morally and legally unjustifiable. They destroy indiscriminately - soldiers and civilians; men, women and children; the aged and the newly born; the healthy and the infirm. The world would be a far safer and better place if the Pandora’s Box of nuclear weapons had never been opened.
The abolishment of nuclear weapons has been an ongoing argument since the bombing of Hiroshima. Although this motion is strongly agreed on, not all countries have signed a worldwide treaty to ensure the use of nuclear weapons is prohibited. A nuclear weapon can be used to destroy a large are of space with an explosion that is larger than any other bomb on the planet. The splitting of two extremely reactive elements causes a nuclear explosion.
Also today is the danger that life is extinguished on earth through such a horrible weapon , not over. Many states are in possession of nuclear bombs , because that means for them power. Even dictatorships and unjust regime like China and North Korea have nuclear weapons.
The Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919, was made upon at the end of the World War I; the purpose of this treaty was to create a peace between the Allied Powers and Germany. However, as it’s witnessed, greed won over peace. The Allied powers chose vengeance against Germany, instead of world peace. They decided to strip Germany of their land, military forces, and make them pay significant reparations for all the destruction that happened because of the war. This angered Germany and fueled Hitler to rise to power. Although the world has taken note of what happened and learned from history, we are witnessing the same mistakes being made that might lead to another world war. The Non-Proliferation Treaty today reflects similar aspects as the treaty of Versailles, and we need to learn from those mistakes to prevent any future conflict. The treaty of Versailles prevented Germany from being able to defend its country and rebuild a strong economy, and in the same way the Non-Proliferation Treaty prevents Iran from building a strong military while limiting Iran’s economic growth, so in order to prevent potential conflicts the Non-Proliferation Treaty has to be revised.
...t said, Iran can really be a threat to us with their nuclear weapons if they are thinking about using it or testing it.
Nuclear weapon is a new kind of technology that gives us an unprecedented power over nature and humanity. The technological decisions regarding nuclear weapons will have a huge impact upon all nations around the world and even future generations. “Of all the unprecedented powers in our hands, none is potentially more destructive than nuclear weapons. For forty years we lived with the threat of a nuclear holocaust that could wipe out a large part of humanity and other forms of life” (Barbour, 200). This technology increases the power of one nation, or a small group of nations, over other nations and nature. Corruption, a shadow of power, lurks around the corner where power is present. With the advancement of nuclear weapons technology, the chances of a “master race” wanting to dominate the world is not far fetch. The possibility of a second Adolph Hitler is high, and this time the existence of humanity is at risk. We need to approach this area of technology with caution and with modesty because these devices have incredible destructive power. As the technology advances and the devices become more powerful, we need to become more careful to use them wisely or the extinction of the human race and other life forms are at stake.
The war between Iraq and Iran was a war between two rival states with different religious/fundamental views, ethnic backgrounds, historical ethnic and border tensions, and power-hungry national leadership who were striving for the position as the dominant Persian Gulf state (Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)). This war is significant for several reasons: it the longest conventional war in the 20th century (lasting from 1980 to 1988), it was witness several unique and horrific tactics and it set the stage for Iraq’s eventual invasion of Kuwait (Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)). The Iraq-Iran war is a prime example of two competing Nationalist/Fundamentalist states, and its repercussions have left long-lasting effects that are still felt today.
...that it will not accept a future in which Iran--its Shiite, Persian rival--has nuclear weapons and it does not” (Allison). If many more countries create nuclear weapons, the world could be in danger of a nuclear war just like it was during the Cold War.
Iran’s leaders have always emphasized a set of “red lines,” vowing not to stop enrichment, which has been demanded by five United Nations Security Council resolutions. The Iranians also refuse to temporarily halt enrichment.
Since its origin in 1948, North Korea has been isolated and heavily armed, with hostile relations with South Korea and Western countries. It has developed a capability to produce short- and medium-range missiles, chemical weapons, and possibly biological and nuclear weapons. In December 2002, Pyongyang lifted the freeze on its plutonium-based nuclear weapons program and expelled IAEA inspectors who had been monitoring the freeze under the Agreed Framework of October 1994. As the Bush administration was arguing its case at the United Nations for disarming Iraq, the world has been hit with alarming news of a more menacing threat: North Korea has an advanced nuclear weapons program that, U.S. officials believe, has already produced one or two nuclear bombs. As the most recent standoff with North Korea over nuclear missile-testing approaches the decompression point, the United States needs to own up to a central truth: The region of Northeast Asia will never be fully secure until the communist dictatorship of North Korea passes from the scene. After threatening to test a new, long-range missile, Pyongyang says it is willing to negotiate with "the hostile nations" opposing it. But whether the North will actually forgo its test launch is anyone's guess. North Korea first became embroiled with nuclear politics during the Korean War. Although nuclear weapons were never used in Korea, American political leaders and military commanders threatened to use nuclear weapons to end the Korean War on terms favorable to the United States. In 1958, the United States deployed nuclear weapons to South Korea for the first time, and the weapons remained there until President George Bush ordered their withdrawal in 1991. North Korean government stateme...
Governments from other countries should be able to work things out and settle business without fearing that someone will be threatened with a nuclear war. These weapons have a very high percent of total destruction, other countries do not think about when they use these fatal weapons as an excuse, of what they will really do when sending the bombs off. They are only thinking of defending themselves no matter what the consequences are, little do they know that it could come back and bite them in the butt. Nuclear weapons will not only cause destruction to one country but all of them. Banning these dangerous weapons will make sure that these excuses will no longer be a problem to the world, countries and nations will not have to fear if they are putting the entire world in
It is a well-known fact that the dropping of the two atomic bombs near the end of World War II in 1945 ushered in the dawn of the Atomic Age. For the first time in human history, the world was introduced to the awesome power of nuclear weapons. Since that time, there have been several different nuclear threats to the world, and one of those threats can be found along the Pacific Rim, in the country of North Korea. Like the dropping of the atomic bombs, it is also known that the North Korean government has admitted to possessing nuclear weapons, and in doing so, it stands as a silent, potential nuclear danger to the rest of the world.