Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
Weapons of Mass Destruction
It is 1945, August 16, and a small Japanese child who lives near a factory in Hiroshima that is producing war goods was walking to his sweatshop. He thought that it was going to be a normal day, but he was wrong. All of the sudden he saw a huge plane fly over the factory about five and a half miles away. Then, a huge cloud forms where the factory used to be and a strong gust of wind carrying debris toward him. Not knowing the air is scorching hot, he just turned away thinking that it is only the blast from the bomb. Sadly, the bomb is the atomic bomb and the air burned him all over his body. He was able to get up on his own, but he was shocked at what he saw. The factory is gone and everything around it is gone too. Weapons of mass destruction have been used thought out all of warfare and have had serious consequences. By definition a weapon of mass destruction is any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people. Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because they kill uncontrollably, their harsh effect on the environment, and because they kill inhumanly. Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because they kill uncontrollably. In the 14th century, the plague, which is now a biological weapon, killed about 25 million people in 5 years. If the plague or another biological, such as smallpox weapon were released, experts say it would be very difficult to contain because we have a very weak immune system to those weapons. One of the first times the plague has been as a weapon of mass destruction when the barbarian hordes lead by Genghis Khan. When he attacked a walled city
Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
he would toss dead body infected with the plague in hopes to infect the residents, it was successful and killed uncontrollably causing the Black Death. Also, when chemical weapons are released, you cant stop them from killing. For example, when a vesicant (blister) agent is released, such as mustard gas and you are not wearing protective clothing, it will cause severe blisters everywhere. (Potential Chemical Weapons) On top of that nuclear weapons are uncontrollable and have massive power. The atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki killed 70,000 to 100,000 people with the initial blast. (Nuclear Terminology) The after effect of the bomb caused major radiation problems for the people who survived. In Hiroshima an additional 60,000 people died from radiation poisoning. (Nuclear Weapons) The people who survived both of that have a much higher chance of getting cancer. Even President Harry Truman saw the great power in the atomic bomb by saying, It is an atomic bomb. It is a harnessing of the basic power of the universe. The force from which the sun draws its power has been loosed against those who brought war to the Far East.(Truman), sixteen hours after, it was dropped on Hiroshima. The President did not see what nuclear weapons would evolve into, which was the hydrogen bomb. The hydrogen bomb has many similarities, but a few major differences that make it one of the most freighting weapons of mass destruction ever made. Like atomic bombs, the hydrogen bomb causes radiation poisoning and increase chance of cancer. On the other hand the hydrogen bomb uses nuclear fusion, not fission and that makes all the difference. The hydrogen bomb is equal to many millions of tons of TNT, unlike the 20,000 tons of TNT an atomic bomb is equivalent to. (Nuclear Terminology) Weapons of mass destruction are uncontrollable and they should have a stricter ban on them.
Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because of their effects on the environment, animals and plants that inhabit that area. Usually this is a side effect of the immense power of nuclear weapons such as: the atomic and hydrogen bomb, but there are chemical weapons that are produced to destroy plant. These chemicals are called orange agents attack the metabolism of plants causing them to die, consequently messing up the whole food chain. Because of the lack of plants, the animals that hide in them and feed off of them die and the animals that eat them starve and so on. These chemicals were produced in hopes to get rid of hiding places and destroy the food for the people. Also these chemical agents will most likely be used in jungle warfare having a huge effect on not only that city but the rest of the world that depends on the products that they make. If a jungle ecosystem is destroyed it might take many decades to recover, or it might never come back. Showing that weapons of mass destruction destroy the environment and everything that lives in it, and that they should have a stricter ban on them. These types of agents were used during the Vietnam War in the jungles of Vietnam. America dumped about 20,000,000 gallons of orange agent destroying 123,552,184 acres. (Agent Orange) This caused a chain of reaction making thousands upon thousands of innocent animals suffer and died. The other main contributors to environmental destruction are nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have a few ways to do this, first is the immediate blast, flattening everything in a matter a seconds within many square miles of the impact. Then there is something called nuclear fallout, after the explosion debris that comes in contact with radioactive material becomes radioactive can move over hundreds of miles before landing and then it can kill animals and destroy plant life. (Nuclear Weapons) On top of that fallout can go into the water killing fish and everything that lives off of the water.
Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
Also the radiation that from the blast can stay in the area and go into the ground. If this happens, plants will not be able to grow in the ground because it has become unfertile. This effect may stay in the ground for many years making it a horrible place to live. Weapons of mass destruction have large effects on the environment and all of its inhabitants and should have a stricter ban on them.
Weapons of mass destruction should not be used in warfare and also have a stricter ban on them because they kill inhumanly. The two best examples of inhumane weapons of mass destruction are chemical and biological weapons because of the way they kill, although chemical weapons kill faster. The four main types of chemical weapons are: Cyanide (Blood), Pulmonary (Choking), nerve, and Vesicant (Blister) Agents. (Potential Chemical Weapons) The two most gruesome chemical weapons are pulmonary and vesicant agents, and are two perfect examples of why weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them. Pulmonary agents such as chlorine kill by entering the body and when come in contact with water they form a type of acid, like when you jump in a pool and your eyes burn. (Potential Chemical Weapons) When this happens the acid collects in the lungs and you choke to death. The other agent, vesicant causes blisters all over the body when it comes in contact with the skin. Death occurs within a day and usually is causes by immune system failure. (Potential Chemical Weapons) During World War One mustard gas, the best know blister agent, was used to break up stalemates in trench warfare. Also biological weapons such as, smallpox, plague and anthrax also should have a stricter ban on them because of the inhumanity they cause when killing. (Potential Biological Weapons) The plague and smallpox are somewhat similar in how they kill;
Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
both cause blisters and when released into a population would spread rapidly without an antidote. (Potential Biological Weapons)They one major difference is that the plague is easier identified spread be people and is the most likely biological weapon that would be used because of its killing abilities. Anthrax kills by causing an overwhelming infection, but it has an antidote although when signs show is all ready too late. (Potential Biological Weapons) In 2001 a few weeks after 9/11 a man sent a letter filled with anthrax to a senator and killing 5 people and injured many more with the small amount in the letter. Nuclear weapons may kill quickly most of the time but they people who didnt die in the initial blast went through radiation poisoning and could have suffered many blisters. Weapons of mass destruction should not be used and should have a stricter ban on them because of the way they kill and the pain they cause while killing.
Some people believe that weapons of mass destruction should be able to be used during warfare, but they are wrong. Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban. Some people believe that weapons of mass destruction are helpful during war. They think that if they are able to kill everyone, then the enemy will be forced to surrender, and some people dont care about the side effects of such great power. One of the first biological weapons was when the plague was used carelessly to take over a city and started the Black Death, it ended up killing over 25 million people. One of the best known times a chemical weapon was used was during World War 1 when they used mustard gas and many other chemical weapons to clear the trenches during a stalemate. Another time a weapon of mass destruction was used was during World War II the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds
Matt Prestia Block 2 Persuasive Essay 3/10/11
of millions and causing pain and suffering to many more. Even one of our presidents fell victim of abusing the power and this shows in his speech after the atomic bomb was dropped in sating, We are now prepared to obliterate more rapidly and completely every productive enterprise the Japanese have above ground in any city. We shall destroy their docks, their factories, and their communications. Let there be no mistake; we shall completely destroy Japan's power to make war,(Truman), by saying that he showed great disregarded to all of the innocent people that live around or work in the factories. All of these were not well thought out and produced severe consequences, showing that weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them, therefore, not being used in warfare. Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them for various reasons. First, weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because they kill uncontrollably; as shown when dead bodies infected with the plague were flung into city causing the Black Death and killed 25 million people in five years. Also during Vietnam when America used orange agents to kill vegetation showed the effects on plant life. Lastly weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because they do not kill humanly, for example when chorine is used and it creates an acid in your lungs and you drown to death. Weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them because they are uncontrollable as they kill, they destroy the environment and they kill in a way that is inhuman. Go out now, speak out, and tell someone what you think. Spread the word; write a letter to the government. Everyone can make a change in the world, so tell someone that weapons of mass destruction should have a stricter ban on them.
