Can one make the decision to take life in the hopes of saving life? This is the question which ultimately plagues many when discussing the morality of the nuclear bomb. While some will arrogantly and automatically dismiss nuclear warfare in hopes of an unreachable world peace, most reasonable men will ask themselves whether or not the benefits outweigh the costs.

However, making this decision is not easy. To complicate matters, it is never simply a judgment between the lives of many and the lives of few, as any decision made to use the atomic bomb will bare unforeseeable consequences. As seen with the Japanese bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the long term consequences are very harsh, as both of these cities suffered from radiation poisoning, huge casualties, and a sense of insecurity that penetrates their societies today. However, it cannot go without saying that these bombings did end the Second World War. The question that has yet to be unanimously answered by society is whether or not the lives saved by ending the war early, were worth the amount of damage caused to these two cities.

It goes without saying that this question will most likely never be answered, and that the countries affected by nuclear warfare will never fully heal from such a traumatic event. For such reasons, the use of nuclear warfare should only be used in desperate situations. But has today’s society totally eliminated any possible use of the atomic bomb.

It reasonable for people to be cautious when using such a powerful weapon as it requires great responsibility. But if the US was involved in a situation like that of the Second World War, would the US be able to set aside fear and make a conscience decision? Is the US willing to hold the threat of nuclear warfare over its enemies?

With the recent split among US politics, and the waging war in the Middle East, it appears that there has been an uprising of anti-war views. Such views are necessary in any society, as a balance to counter opposing aggressive views. But such views become dangerous with wide growth. A society bent on anti-war feelings is weak, hesitant, and unable to compete against rogue countries that don’t follow social standards. What’s even more dangerous is when these rogue countries possess nuclear arms, as they are no where near as hesitant as ourselves. These are real threats, and society’s conceptions of nuclear warfare must change from a world run by caretakers, to a dog-eat-dog world.