Guillermo Valdovinos

Should nations stockpile weapons of mass destruction?

Nations making a big pile of bombs is an issue that has support on both sides.
People who are against it say bombs are a potential danger for humanity, and people
who support the use of bombs say they are necessary to keep control. After researching
the pros and cons of this topic, I support the arguments of people who are against
nations stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. These are the reasons why I support
them: First, Nations with nuclear weapons are most likely to get in war and therefore the
citizens get involved as well putting at risk their lives. Secondly, making powerful
weapons require tremendous amounts of money to be spent, money that can be used
to solve internal problems instead. Thirdly, nuclear arsenals are a tremendous danger of
death for every living organism in the earth. I am certain that after you look at my
findings you will agree with me.
Those who are convinced that nations have no need to make and store nuclear
weapons say nuclear weapons are a threat and unnecessary for humans. Their
evidence is in the results of The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear
War, an organization that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985, which showed that even
a "limited" nuclear war would damage the earth's climate in profound, long-lasting
ways. (Douglas Roche). People who is against bombs also say that more than 100
countries have agreed to stop using cluster bombs, which means that a lot of politicians
accepted the reality of how dangerous bombs are. If all these countries are bombs-free,
why are other countries still making bombs? According to Washington Post article,
States with nuclear weapons maintain they are the ultimate insurance policy against

Guillermo Valdovinos

fighting, or losing, a war. Recent history suggests otherwise: Nuclear powers have
fought and even lost a number of wars during the atomic age. (Blechman and
Bollfrass).
Those who want nations to stockpile bombs say Nuclear weapons are used
every day to deter our potential foes and provide reassurance to the parties who we
offer protection. (Melanie Kirkoatrick). They also say that a powerful country is a
country that has nuclear power and that it is the only way to intimidate the enemies. If
the United States bans the bombs, the country itself and allies will be unprotected.
Dozens of our allies and partners depend upon U.S. nuclear weapons for their security.
Therefore, Nuclear power is necessary to keep order.
After researching both sides of this issue, I am totally convinced that nuclear
power is totally obsolete and should be prohibited. Nuclear weapons make a big
disaster and kill everything in a range of miles, For example: Harris, a worker of an
organization that cleans up a place after bombs have detonated, says Never in my
lifetime, in Lao, will we clean up the mess that we created there. Weapons of mass
destruction are destruction hazards for the planet. Also, bombs cost millions to be
constructed, according to Roche, the United States spends $110 million a day on its
nuclear forces. It is a tremendous amount of money that could be used to solve other
problems that this country has instead of just wasting it on bombs. According to the
article Sleepwalking in a nuclear minefield Douglas Roche says that studies made by
scientists have showed that economic collapse and nuclear-war-induced famine are
the results from even a small exchange of nuclear weapons. The same article also

Guillermo Valdovinos

explains how all major religions protest against the extreme danger bombs make on our
lives by saying:
Just when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its follow-up
instruments have made it clear that every human--no matter the culture,
religion, ideology, or geography--has the right to life, we have perfected
our ability to kill massively. This contradiction grotesquely distorts the
meaning of life. The gradual increase in humanity's understanding of itself
will lead to societal condemnation of nuclear weapons when it is fully
understood that such instruments of evil are a violation of life itself.
(Douglas Roche)
Nuclear weapons shouldnt exist in our world; they are an extreme danger to the earth.
Bombs destroy entire places, cost millions, and make more disaster than order. There is
no reason to make bombs. All the countries should recognize that bombs do not have
any good purpose and should ban them forever. After showing you all these facts I am
certain you will agree with me that bombs have no good on anything, and we should
stop the governments of making them.