blitz_ctr

ok im doing a project on how nuclear warfare is currently affecting society, and im haveing trouble finding stuffs, can you guys think of anything that would be of assistance to me?.......i know this is a really random question, but you guys mus tknow something.....thanks

imported_viper_2_4

search for "IRAN nuclear", that should give you enough resources...

imported_d16y8

Nuclear weapons have only ever been used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, so the term nuclear warfare isn't really correct. A country that has nuclear weapons has alot of power and influence over other countries, especially those that are not nuclear powers. If I had to answer that question about how nuclear weapons are affecting society today, I would definately point out how Iran hopes to assert themselves as a power. Do some research on the bombing of Japan, the power struggle between United States and the USSR during the cold war and relate it to todays times. Thats what I would do.

Oh and remember, don't believe everything you read on the interent, alot of it is biased garbage.

szuberi

That was a lame answer Alex. You cant single out IRAN just cuz that is a hot topic right now.

I will try to help. I am assuming you are talking about the threat of nuclear weapons and their potential impact on the society and human race because there is no nuclear war going on at the moment that is affecting anyone (viz "how nuclear warfare is currently affecting society"). Its just about the potential that is so deadly.

Some things that you should research are:

1) History of nuclear research and development
2) Circumstances that led to such development
3) Major players (**** Germany, USSR, USA etc.)
4) Timeline of major events (1930s to present)

Once you have these basics right...than you can develop thesis as to how it has affected, is affecting today and potential tommorrow.

Some random pointers.....

1. Conventional warfare vs. Nuclear Warfare
2. Nuclear weapons as a deterrent rather than a threat (Do some research of the early cold war era (1959 onwards) and specially the times of JFK and his administration's policy on nuclear warfare
3. CTBT of 1962
4. Threat of nuclear proliferation

PM me if you need more help....good luck

imported_viper_2_4

well, I don't think it was lame, rather incomplete. If your interested in current events that could trigger and/or are leading to possible nuclear warefare. But your right to fully research the effects of nuclear warefare there should be a full evaluation of past events, as you've mentioned.

imported_d16y8

Iran should be mentioned, but don't base your project entirely on it.

imported_Bruce Fee

nuclear weapons = progress.

no one wants to fight people with them.

that's until something happens and we all die.
Fail-Safe... look up that movie... or at least people's reviews and comments... it's a good movie to watch for your topic (plus you see Mr Wilson from Dennis the Menace smack a few broads around)

During the cold war, the US army constantly had bombers in the air ready to drop bombs at any given time. Bombers would constantly fly, refuel, and fly. This is real, not just a movie.

Always ready for mass death.

Fail-Safe deals with this and what if something went wrong. The fail-safe technology is not so fail-safe and the hilarity ensues (people getting killed, etc)

look up information on doctor stranglove as well... there is a lot of sociological commentary in both of these movies regarding nuclear weapons (or in the case of dr stranglove, a doomsday device)

the US was able to avoid a lot of casualties on it's own side in ww2, but they killed a lot of innocent people. I probably would have done the same. It is natural to protect 'your own'

don't look at only recent developments.. you have to look it from the beginning.

would the united nations have been created if we didn't have such weapons (even though the US pissed all over it)? would we really care as much if 'bad guys' (even though reality is not like GI joe) had power and money?

the cold war happened because the soviets and the americans both had nukes... if they didn't i think the world would be much different... it forced them to avoid attacking eachother as it would mean the destruction of both nations.

on a side note, kruschev and gorbachev are cool.

boris sucks.

Brett

what about dicussing the use of depleted uranium bullets?

E_Jak

recent;y Stephen Harper has be involved with the US in joint programs of national defence with regard to nuclear programs. That might be a relevant topic.

Star Wars

imported_gatherer

those are some great starting points for research, however one small error, the ***** never obtained Nuclear weapons, they were working towards it but the research was never completed by the time the research facilities were over run.

Also Bruce Fee, The Japanese only surrendered after russia started a land invasion of it's Mainland China holdings that it had captured earlier in the war. of course the 2 nukes did provide crippling blows to the infrastructure in Japan, but it didn't bring it to it's knees.

The Main issue with Nukes is it doesn't over whelm your Enemies infrastructure, you instantly kill off a bunch of people, instead of just maiming all of them. What is harder on a countries infrastructure? 100,000 dead from a nuke or 100,000 wounded from a fire bombing or some such thing. the dead don't require the massive number of services that the wounded would require. and if you want to win a war you gotta over whelm the enemies infrastructure.

szuberi

Thanks for your response Jason. I stated the ***** were major players in the nuclear game and didnt say that they ever acquired these weapons before the third reich collapsed.

You said it right that they had the developing technology and some history papers suggest that they were even planning to launch a nuclear weapon on US through Japan in Aug. 1945.

Your point in the last para is interesting. I think its about the morale also. You kill amass in one ago...destroy the infrastructure and kill all the confidence of your adversary (provided the other side does not have the same weapons)

In my opinion..the most important factor of nuclear warfare is the "significant potential of suffering & loss of human life".

Bruce...in response to your statement
"During the cold war, the US army constantly had bombers in the air ready to drop bombs at any given time. Bombers would constantly fly, refuel, and fly. This is real, not just a movie"

That is true and it didnt happen all the time. The most noteable event was the cuban missile crisis of Oct 1962 when offensive weapons were discovered on the island by US reconnaisance. US B52s constantly flew from airfields in southern florida loaded with nukes. I think that was the closest the world came to nuclear war. 13 Days is an excellent movie which depicts this event.

Personally...it freaks me out. Back home in Pakistan...the government has nukes and so is the case with India. Our technology was developed with the help of China while India was aided by Russia. One signle reason...power struggle in the region.

Countries with nukes, which are otherwise not very well-off are also vulnerable..like Pakistan and India. Even a minor shift in the balance of power in the region can have a devastating effect on the economy and the lives of its people. Like when Pakistan conducted the tests in May of 1998, all foreign currency accounts in the country were frozen so that the foreign private capital does not flow out of the country. That dwindled the trust of people and effects are still seen to this day.

On the other hand, otherwise well-off and rich nations like US, USSR and UK has a bigger responsibility to destroy such huge stockpiles but i dont know fi that will ever happen.

imported_Bruce Fee

Hitler didn't approve of quantum physics... it was referred to as 'jew physics'

E_Jak

reminds me of a joke,

if a dozen donuts is 12

and a "baker's dozen" means 13

How many donuts are in a Jewish dozen?

imported_Bruce Fee

i once told a racist joke to a friend of mine at a house party where i had promised to the owner that i would behave.

these girls heard it, thought it was funny and asked if i had any more. i told them i didn't want to offend them. they pushed and pushed and i told them 2 jokes, but i tied them together.

as they stared at me with their jaws dropped, i pretended to think they didn't get it, so i explained it to them.

they all left the room and avoided me all night.

i crack myself up.

----

depends, if you want to say they are cheap and the seller, than it's 11, if they are the buyer something like 'as many as they can get'. the usual joke stereotype of jewish people is that they are cheap. that's why that is what i assumed.

you can substitute blue, and green, throw in the punch line, and the joke will have the same effect, and you won't be branded racist by idiots.

plus it helps remove any bias from most parties when discussing a principal or ideal revolving around a racial/national/gender/religious argument.

E_Jak

hey, i make fun of myself all of the time, if someone is offended by this harmless joke, then i think they are the ones with the problem... I dish it out because I can take it myself.

anyways, let's help this guy with his research ideas, i have kind of piggy-backed on his thread.

blitz_ctr

lol yay! i get my thread back, ok this is due tomorrow, i have listened to pretty much everyones suggestions, thanks guys, any last minute ideas?

imported_gatherer

last minute Idea: Grab one of the topic starters that has been suggested and run with it

imported_Bruce Fee

okay man, write about why you wish you had nuclear weapons and the ability to use them however you want.

tell her if you don't get an A, it's a prime example of a reason why you would use one.

blitz_ctr

lol hmm, good thing i handed it in b4 i read this post, well thanks for all the help, i think i pulled off like an 80 sumthing. good enough.....