Discussing the reasons on Nuclear testing in the pacific region by Britain, and France.
The British and French government, during the 1950's and 1960's conducted major nuclear testing, in the pacific region, which had affected the lives of many. It is important to note, why did the both of these nations, conduct such tests on foreign soil? Thus, this essay, will explore the different perspectives of why such nuclear experiments were conducted, the attitude displayed by the victims and governments involved, and more important, the environmental and health impact it caused.
Without a doubt, even today, the nuclear threat is not far from over. As stated by William E.Burrows and Robert Windrem, in their book "Critical Mass" state, "The proliferation of super weapons is now the most dangerous specter facing this planet." In the 1950s the Australian government had permitted the British to develop a nuclear weapons program in Australia. In 1952, the British government detonated "Hurricane", a twenty-five kilo tonne nuclear weapon above the ocean. The British nuclear testing in Maralinga included many so called "minor" tests, which consisted of about five-hundred experiments during 1952 to 1963. These included, for example the crashing of aero planes with nuclear weapons on board, or according to Australian archive documents at Scotland's Dundee University, twenty-four Australian servicemen tested different types of clothing to find out what protection they offered against radiation. It is easy to view, that the British government reason, that they were only conducting experiments of nuclear weapons on objects and "things", however, their attitude to such testing was not acceptable or appropriate.
In 1957, the British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan stated, "We have made a successful
start. When the [nuclear] tests are completed, as they soon will be, we shall be in the same
position as the United States or Soviet Russia. We shall have made and tested the massive
weapons. It will...
More Military & International Conflicts & Security
essays:
The Threat of Nuclear Weapons
... This test convinced the U.S. government that nuclear weapons could ... The critical mass of a material depends on its purity. The materials used in making fission weapons are uranium and plutonium. They are the only elements able to be used in making a fission weapon. There are two different ways ...
Nuclear Weapons.
... new weapons (Schwartz 3). The United States nuclear weapons program poses serious health risks ...
Was the 2003 war in Iraq justified and necessary?
... any weapons inspectors. More than enough time for Iraq to develop and possibly build a nuclear device. A threat recognised ... and Nuri-as-Said. A coup was stopped by the British in 1941. In 1958, the pro-West government was overthrown by Abd al-Karim Qasim. Qasim survived an ...
The Nuclear Posture Review: The Wrong Road to Security.
... annihilation. Proliferation of nuclear weapons is at the heart of the NPR. The whole report is based on what types of new nuclear warheads, delivery, and planning systems are required to make the U.S. nuclear threat to ...
"Nuclear Proliferation Involving Rogue Countries"
... of nuclear weapons attack, the country must overtake the experiments and tests run ... to mass produce these uranium canisters for nuclear weapons will help in letting other rogue countries know that the United States will not stand for threats. Even ...
the need and utility of nuclear weapons , destructors or Saviors?
... 000 nuclear weapons-which translates into 120 nuclear detonations on ... stance, also exemplifies the words of an American Nobel Laureate, William Faulkner, 'I believe that man will not merely endure: he ...
Is Nuclear War a Possibility.
... the 1950s, India and Pakistan changed the rules of the game in May 1998 as both nations tested Nuclear Weapons. While the explosions did have testing value, their main impact was ...
Germany's view on the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Rogue States
... and nuclear weapons need to be included in this definition. Furthermore, Germany believes that there must be a clear distinction with types of weapons of mass destruction: method of distribution must be considered, to gauge the threat posed. Proliferation is ...