Debating the Atomic Bomb in the New York Times Article

Debating the nuclear Bomb in the New York generation - bind ExampleThis pillar makes it a point to mention that, if a third world war is to be avoided, then the public must become until now more involved. The author of this editorial, who is not named, makes the point that scientists ar creating weapons that can alter the course of history. As much(prenominal), they must have a responsibility to ensure these weapons are purposed as a deterrent, rather than for purposes of evil. The author contends that never before in history have scientists held so much power and, as such(prenominal), a debate must take place to determine how, if ever, such bombs will be used again. This keeps in line with the political leaning of the New York Times during this time period. The paper, while not necessarily being outspoken critics of war efforts undertaken by the United States, certainly advocated a stance more towards the concept of neutrality. The Atomic Bomb was a big step in the advancemen t of war technology and editorials in the New York Times during 1945 took a hesitant stance towards its provided development. If you will, it would appear that the editorial board of the paper certainly did not want to appear proud of the fact that we had dropped two such massive bombs on Japan. Finally, this editorial piece focused its attention on the beginning to educate the public more about the advances of comprehension. To this point, the author contends that scientific advancement went largely unnoticed. Now that weapons, such as the atomic bomb, are being created, the public must have more of a voice. The obvious point here is made that the decision to use such weapons eventually impacts every citizen in the country, so they need to make their voices heard. This position of getting the public more involved in the affairs of science is the overarching theme of this particular editorial. Analysis The author of this editorial has two main points. The major idea centers on the responsibility that scientists who are in charge of creating such weapons as the atomic bomb have. This responsibility entails them understanding the power of destruction they hold over the world as these bombs are created. Furthermore, a second underlie theme of the editorial the contention that scientists need to bring the atomic bomb debate to the American people. Since citizens are directly impacted by these weapons use, all of golf-club has the responsibility to let the government know whether or not they approve of its eventual deployment in times of war. The atomic bomb was designed to bring a quick end to any conflict. Scientists developed it with this end result in mind.