| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SPREAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS REVIEW": |
|
|
"The Spread of Nuclear Weapons"--a Review, 2007.
This paper examines the viewpoints expressed in "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons" by Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan.
1,946 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews the book "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons" through comparing and contrasting the viewpoints of its authors, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan. The claims of both Waltz and Sagan are examined as well as the larger arguments from realists and liberals regarding the spread of nuclear weapons. Waltz's realist arguments are contrasted with the more international liberalism of Sagan's protests against adding nuclear weapons in nations which have not traditionally had such programs. The current situation in North Korea is highlighted as an example for each perspective.
From the Paper
"Nuclear weapons have become the most powerful bargaining tool in the world today, evidenced by the situations in North Korea and Iran and the considerable international unrest they have caused. Nuclear powers fear the addition of new nuclear nations, and nations which do not possess such capabilities see them as potential bargaining chips and defense mechanisms against the more powerful nations. In their joint project The Spread of Nuclear Weapons, Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan each defend their view regarding the spread of nuclear weapons. Waltz's realist viewpoint sees the increase in the number of nuclear nations as a potentially stabilizing factor in international relations and strongly believes that more nuclear weapons can contribute to stability in highly volatile areas, similar to the detente achieved between India and Pakistan after each of those traditionally antagonistic nations established nuclear capability."
| |
|
"The Spread Of Nuclear Weapons" by Scott Sagan and Kenneth Waltz, 1999.
A critical review of this collection of opposing views on the need for nuclear weapons.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The debate over the production of nuclear weapons began with the announcement of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The power of the weapon and the devastation it wrought frightened many Americans, not for the least reason because they considered what would happen if the weapon were turned on them, but also out of a humanitarian concern for the horror and death the bomb brought to Japan. The arguments have continued on both sides ever since, and even today in the post-Cold War era, the issue remains vital because more and more countries are seeking and achieving atomic capability. Nuclear proliferation, or the spread of nuclear weaponry to more and more countries, has long been a fear of the U.S. government, and efforts have been made to control the distribution of nuclear materials. Another worry today is that technology has advanced..."
| |
|
Nuclear Weapons, 2006.
A discussion, in the form of creative writing, about the use of nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
1,037 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper intersperses facts about nuclear weapons with a narrative from the perspective of Bob and Loretta Lehman and Laura Fermi. The writer describes what it is like to be caught in a nuclear attack. The paper explains that before the nuclear weapons were used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was very little testing done on the effects that a nuclear weapon would have. The writer describes the two different bombs used, one being a gun-type nuclear weapon and the other an implosion-type nuclear weapon. In conclusion, the writer expresses the feeling that it was not necessary to drop the bomb on Japan.
From the Paper
"I was sitting at home, when Charles, (her son) ,came running came into the room screaming, we blew up all of Japan - this is how Loretta Lehman learned of the United States newfound power, the nuclear weapon. At first I was scared, because bob was still in Germany, but I then went and talked to my neighbors and they said that Japan was going to surrender, and the u.s. would win, that is when all my worries went away.
"Loretta's husband, Bob, was stationed in France, but was back on the U.S. side when the bombs were dropped, he had this to say. Back then, I felt that dropping the bomb was a good idea, but as time has gone on, and I have thought about it more, I am realizing some fault that could have gone along with it. After the war in Europe had ended, we were shipped to the U.S. and were going to be re-stationed somewhere in the pacific, but then [the nuclear weapon] was dropped, and the war ended. I asked Bob why he felt the U.S. felt the bomb needed to be dropped. [My company] felt that by dropping the bomb, the war would end sooner, quicker, and with less loss of life."
| |
|
Russian Nuclear Weapons: The Threat Remains, 1999.
This paper details the ?disturbing truth about the safety of Russian nuclear weapons and the risk of an accidental nuclear war.
2,683 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 16 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper details the four threats of nuclear annihilation that the Russian nuclear program has created: accidental launch due to a malfunction, failure of the Russian early warning system, a launch of a nuclear weapon because of a rogue commander, the detonating of a stolen nuclear warhead that has been smuggled out of Russia, and the detonation of a nuclear weapon that was built with Russian fissile material. The paper also describes the meager steps that Russia and the United States have taken to prevent a nuclear catastrophe. Most importantly the paper stresses that public awareness of this critical situation is imperative to prevention of such a disaster.
| |
|
Nuclear Weapons and the Cold War, 2002.
An analysis of detection success of nuclear weapons during the Cold War.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper evaluates how much the United States and the Soviet Union knew about each other's nuclear capability during the Cold War.
| |
|
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 2005.
A thorough analysis of the arguments in favor of nuclear proliferation and the arguments opposed to it.
2,676 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 12 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at the arguments opposed to and in favor of nuclear proliferation, noting the politics and philosophies behind both sides. After summarizing the arguments, the paper then concludes that, ironically, the very factors and sentiments that encourage nuclear proliferation are the same as those that discourage its proliferation.
From the Paper
"Ever since the first atom bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world has been polarized into two different groups: one that supports nuclear proliferation, and another that vehemently campaigns against the piling up of nuclear material in the world. Both groups have their own arguments to justify their stand. While those who oppose nuclear weapons argue that nuclear proliferation endangers the very existence of the world and international peace, the supporters of nuclear weapons argue that nuclear weapons are required as a deterrent force. The American policy of minimum deterrence echoes this sentiment. However, considering the fact that the world reached dangerously close to an all out nuclear war way back in the eighties during the cold war years, points to the fact that the policy of minimum deterrence can, in the hands of hot-headed heads of states, become a very dangerous tool for political manipulation."
| |
|
Nuclear Weapons in the Korean Peninsula, 2005.
A review of the issue of the divided Korean peninsula, focusing on the nuclear power capabilities of North Korea.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A backwater of the Cold War since hostilities of the Korean War ended, has been the divided Korean peninsula. Since the 1990s, this issue has repeatedly captured the attention of the world, with the generally assumed rise of North Korea to the status of a nuclear power.
From the Paper
"Since the 1990s the divided Korean peninsula, which had been a backwater of the Cold War since the end of hostilities in the Korean War in the 1950s, has repeatedly captured the world's attention with the widely-assumed rise of North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea or DPRK) to the status of a nuclear power. Given the status of the current dictatorial regime of North Korea as a virtual international "pariah" state - a state in which a massive military exists side-by-side with a primitive, faltering economy and even widespread famine - its nuclear capability has dominated all discussions of its foreign relations and strategies to engage it."
| |
|
Nuclear Weapons Development in India, 1993.
A look at the history, aims, international issues (Pakistan, China, U.S.) and the Indian military.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 12 sources, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Nuclear Weapons Development in India
This research traces nuclear weapons development in India and assesses this development in the context of both international and domestic relations. With respect to international relations, the decision by India to develop nuclear weapons was affected by the actions of other countries, particularly both the People's Republic of China and Pakistan, or at least India's perceptions of those actions.1 In turn, India's development of nuclear weapons affected the foreign and nuclear policies of other countries, again particularly China and Pakistan.2 With respect to domestic relations, India's development of nuclear weapons reflected the pursuit of both economic and political prestige objectives.3
Following this introduction, the history of nuclear development in India is examined. This examination is followed by a consideration of the interplay between India and other countries with respect to the development and use of nuclear weapons. An assessment of the effect on India's armed forces of nuclear weapon development is then presented."
| |
|
Nuclear Proliferation, 2006.
An analysis of "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed" by Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan.
1,284 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Kenneth Waltz and Scott Sagan look through two completely different lenses when looking at the realities of the world, where Waltz's theory is neo-realist structural theory and Sagan's is organization theory. It looks at how their two theories regarding nuclear proliferation have led us to emphasize different aspects of nuclear history and to predict very different nuclear futures.
From the Paper
"Waltz does not think that nuclear proliferation is a bad thing, as he says many times "Nuclear weapons make wars hard to start." (Sagan and Waltz p.45) He believes that deterrence will continue to work; although he is not promoting proliferation he is just realistic by saying proliferation will continue and then he has an optimistic proliferation outlook for what this means to the world. Waltz believes that, "the behavior of new nuclear states will reflect their interest in avoiding nuclear war. New nuclear powers will avoid preventive nuclear wars, develop survivable nuclear arsenals, and prevent nuclear weapons accidents because it is in their obvious national interests to do so." (Sagan and Waltz p. 83) "
| |
|
Nuclear Proliferation, 1995.
This paper discusses the Ameican and international concerns and efforts to stem the spread of nuclear weapons in Third World: Background, examples and monitoring.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 8 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The United States developed the first atomic bomb and used it to end World War II in 1945. After the war, the world was marked by a Cold War that lasted until the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the former Soviet Union at the end of the 1980s. During that long period of time, a number of other nations joined the nuclear club by developing the capability to produce nuclear weapons, and one of the primary goals of American foreign policy was to limit nuclear proliferation to the greatest degree possible. In the changed world circumstances faced today, the danger of nuclear proliferation has not passed. Instead, there is more and more concern about new technological developments that might make it possible for smaller and less-developed nations to produce nuclear weapons that would be smaller and more powerful than the bombs used on Japan in 1945."
| |
|
Japan's Nuclear Capabilities, 2006.
This well-researched paper examines not only whether Japan has the capability to create nuclear weapons but whether or not Japan already has these actual weapons.
6,555 words (approx. 26.2 pages), 17 sources, MLA, $ 150.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This in-depth paper explores the sometimes fragile alliance between Japan and the U.S. and ponders whether or not Japan is capable, from a technical standpoint, of creating nuclear weapons. This paper delves into the possibility that Japan may already have nuclear weapons in its possession. A large number of Japanese citizens and successive governments have favored continuing the alliance with the U. S. which involves enormous reliance on American security and military power to protect Japan from attack. This paper defines article 9, the renunciation of war, of Japan's Peace Constitution. The writer also discusses the economic benefits in developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. This well-researched and informative paper considers some of the means Japan could employ to gain greater military autonomy which includes completing the development and production of advanced weapons such as the FSX fighter. This paper also discusses the various groups and parties that oppose nuclear weapons including the Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs.
From the Paper
"Considering that the huge military-industrial complex of United States is an often-criticized force in the American economy and that maintaining a similarly high level of expenditures on weapons was a critical factor leading to the economic and political failure of the former Soviet Union, many in Japan are understandably content not to have a defense industry of a comparable magnitude. But there are some Japanese willing, and even eager, to duplicate or surpass American state-of-the-art military technology. Those who wish to see Japan more independent of reliance on the American power, who believe Japan's future is dependent on an autonomous defense establishment, favor the concept of Kokusanka or, indigenization of defense production."
| |
|
Nuclear Proliferation, 2006.
A critical statistical analysis of the relationship between the production of nuclear energy and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
2,888 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 9 sources, APA, $ 85.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper employs a critical review of the body of literature, original research synthesis to determine if indeed a causal relationship can be found between the production of nuclear energy and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. An exhaustive statistical regression analysis illustrates that the relationship between the aforementioned variables is not significant and thus, that the hypothesis of correlation and causation cannot be confirmed. However, the paper goes on to provide evidence to suggest correlation between the proliferation of nuclear weapons and other factors such as global military tensions and certain categories of world events. The paper includes graphs and tables.
Paper Outline:
Literature Review
Proposal
Data Sources
Data Analysis
Results and Interpretation
Discussion
Conclusion
Reference List
From the Paper
"The body of literature is generally in concessus with regard to the link between the production of nuclear energy and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. There is, however, disagreement over the method by which nuclear weapons and materials are spread. Some argue that terrorist organisations and rogue states are able to acquire enriched uranium from nuclear waste deposits. Others claim that these parties are more likely to invest in nuclear energy technology as a means of acquiring nuclear weapons while other still claim that the link between these two factors in negligible or non existent. "
| |
|
Nuclear Tests, 2005.
An examination of the history of nuclear weapons testing in the United States and its environmental impacts.
2,345 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 72.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, between 1945 and 1992, over one-thousand nuclear weapon tests were carried out in the U.S.A. It looks at how the poor decisions of leaders has led to one of the largest scale environmental hazards that has ever taken place and how we now need to channel energy into cleaning up the mess. It discusses how investing into technologies that will help clean up the most severely contaminated sites is key to the survival of the environment and how the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) of 1990 must be amended as well to be more inclusive of the people that weapons testing has harmed and more responsibility needs to be taken on the part of the state. This investigation follows the history of nuclear weapons testing in the United States and its environmental impacts. From site selection to pulling the trigger, the issues surrounding environmental equity and the nuclear tragedy are explored to reveal a horrifying story.
Outline
Introduction
Discussion
In the Beginning
The Dawn of the Age of Trinity
Shot Harry: A Shot to the Heart
"Downwinders": Decades After the Fact
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The National Academy of Science (NAS) released a report discussing the long-term problems that downwinders will face in the present and coming years. What they uncovered is quite possibly the worst environmental hazard that has ever occurred. In some areas it has been suggested that it will take three hundred years, or more, for radioactive materials to reach safe levels and some areas may need to be under surveillance for several thousands of years (Fialka, 2000). The NAS report predicted that the long-term costs would be somewhere between one-hundred fifty-one billion to one-hundred ninety-five billion dollars and even more shocking is that some sites may never be completely clean. More problems are arising as urban sprawl continues and these areas face pressure from suburban development (Fialka, 2000)."
| |
|
Weapons of Mass Destruction, 2007.
This paper discusses weapons of mass destruction, which pose a legitimate threat to world safety today.
2,068 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article the writer looks at several different types of weapons of mass destruction, which, when in the wrong hands, can do a great amount of damage. The type of weapons of mass destruction mentioned include biological weapons, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, and radiological weapons. Throughout this paper the writer discusses the various types of weapons of mass destruction and looks at what the individual weapons are called. The writer then examines what these weapons can do and mentions the symptoms of these weapons. Further, the writer explores how they are used and the precautions that can be taken to protect society from them.
From the Paper
"Although anthrax may be the most well known biological weapon, there are several other biological agents which can be used as weapons that are worth noting. These include the Ebola virus, Bubonic plague, Yellow Fever, Smallpox, Ricin, Botulism toxin, Saxitoxin, Rocky Mountain spotted Fever, Typhus, Q fever, and others."
"Biological weapons are not used strictly to attack humans; instead they may be used to attack crops and animals as well to disrupt an area's agricultural supply. Additionally, by attacking the agricultural supply, this may be a way of transmitting the biological weapons to human beings."
"One way to prevent succumbing to some forms of biological weapons is through good hygiene, in much the same way one can prevent the spread of everyday bacteria and viruses."
| |
|
International Atomic Energy Agency, 1995.
Examines the changing role of the U.N. agency in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. Discusses history, functions and the detection of violations.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 14 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE IAEA
This research paper deals with the changing role of the International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations (IAEA) with particular reference to the problem of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Its thesis is that the IAEA plays an important role in preventing the spread of such weapons, but that it labors under numerous handicaps, including inadequate funding, uncertain political direction and, in the case of the Iraqi inspections, internal mismanagement.
Basic Facts Concerning IAEA
Headquartered in Vienna, IAEA was founded in 1957 as an outgrowth of Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace Plan of 1953. Under its enabling statute, it was authorized to:
"establish and administer safeguards designed to ensure that ..."
|
|
|
