Nuclear Arms Opposing Viewp

Ever since the U.S. dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, some argue that nukes pose a threat to humankind. It is known that there are more than enough nuclear weapons in existence today to end the world. Many countries have nuclear weapons, posing a threat to use them in all-out warfare. Some believe that it is necessary to have nuclear weapons, while others beg to differ; they should be disposed of, and further manufacturing should be illegal. Still, others are content with the existence of nuclear weapons, but search for stricter methods to control their use.
Ever since the detonation of the two U.S. atomic bombs over Japan in August 1945, the United States understood how massively destructive those weapons were. They also realized the powerful security value of nuclear weapons -- through the threat of atomic retaliation, the United States could deter almost any nation from attacking it or its allies.
Those aforementioned benefits were not ignored by other nations. In 1949, the Soviet Union became the second nation to develop and test a nuclear weapon. In the ensuing years, the two superpowers (USA and Russia) built the largest nuclear arsenals in the world. Despite their efforts, they refrained from using them, a restraint that was tested most severely during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Ironically, many experts believe that nuclear weapons have helped prevent such an outcome: neither side dared risk initiating hostilities that could lead to a devastating nuclear strike.
The North Koreans, who CIA Director Robert Gates warned may be only a few months away from building an atomic bomb, did it all by themselves. "Things that were very difficult for the smartest people in 1943 are easy for ordinary people now," says Richard Garwin, a former nuclear-weapons designer. He also implied that, if the North Koreans can do it, anyone can.
The West's attempt to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons has failed, and a new and much more dangerous era of nuclear...