evaluation argument essay by Ricardo Cervantes ENG 215
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Ivy Tech Community College, Indianapolis *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
215
Subject
English
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by Easypete18
Ricardo Cervantes
ENG 215
Instructor: Mr. Royse
7/22/22
“America should not reduce its nuclear arsenal vs “America must reduce its nuclear arsenal and
guarantee limits on the use of nuclear force”
There has been many debates or arguments discussed across the world over the inclusion and use of nuclear weapons in any environment or country which in result has created a wide array of online debates on the matter with these mostly being opposing viewpoint articles or essays where the author inputs his or her argumentative opinion into a personalize written body of text to oppose the opinion of another individual who is doing the same. What matters isn’t whose right or wrong in the end though it’s who provides the better argument. In this essay two of these following argumentative articles with opposing perspectives and views will be examined
and analyzed to determine which provides the best argument or argues best in general overall. The two articles in general that will be analyzed are called “America should not reduce its nuclear arsenal by G. Phillip Hughes (2014)” and “America must reduce its nuclear arsenal and guarantee limits on the use of nuclear force by U.S department of defense (2014)”. The criteria set for this argumentative evaluation will be the sources and evidence used and the explanation for the rationale of criteria is that the reasoning and sources of information that the article gives is what matters most when looking into these arguments as good reasoning and evidence is what is needed to support and reinforce the point that the author is arguing in the paper.
After carefully reading and examining both articles and the arguments they provided it is decided
that “America must reduce its nuclear arsenal and guarantee limits on the use of nuclear force” as
it provided a more logical argument with better reasoning and evidence than the opposing article “America should not reduce it’s nuclear arsenal” as it seems to have a reference list of sources but uses and cites nothing other than what if scenarios and predictions as it’s main reasoning making it devoid of any logical reasoning or evidence and is built on nothing than superstition. These examples will now be quoted and cited these to support the previous statement before this sentence (Hughes) “how do we know that a great reduced deterrent force, even if roughly equivalent to Russia’s will be adequate to deter all other corners with a nuclear north Korea and /or Iran?” this seems to be nothing but a prediction or a fictional foreseeable event that is asked to the audience for validation. The argument seems to be more directed towards the Obama administration rather than the reduction of nuclear weapons as (Hughes) constantly states
and mentions it throughout the essay, but does it bring a small bit relevance to the paper as past president barrack Obama had introduced a nuclear policy during his years in office, but this policy is not delved into enough in the argument for it to be justified. Other than that, the argument takes more of political stance than a nuclear weapons stance that is suggested in the opening title of the paper and again provides no logical evidence or cited sources to support its argument
Now begins the reasonings on why “America must reduce its nuclear arsenal and guarantee limits on the use of nuclear force” proved to be the superior argument in the evaluation. Since the
paper doesn’t have an actual person or individual as an author I will be citing (defense) short for U.S department of defense which is listed as the author in the essay. The paper reinforces and support’s it’s perspective by providing real accurate information on the power relationship that
America shares with Russia, and China in terms of nuclear arsenal superiority over every other providence in world. This information will be quoted now to support this statement (defense) “the United States must continue to address the more familiar challenge of ensuring strategic stability with existing nuclear powers- most notably Russia and China” the essay provides more information about nuclear weapons being relevant than the previous paper or essay discussed in the evaluation and is focused less on the political background but more on the main topic actually being argued which is again nuclear weapons. the article uses logical and relevant evidence by stating that nuclear weapons would be useless or ineffective against threats in the modern world such as suicidal terrorists and unfriendly regimes but instead should focus on efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation which seems reasonable if looked from the eyes of the audience. (defense) then lists all the positives that could come from a nuclear weapons reform with realistic and plausible scenarios that could arise such as better stability with all other nuclear superpowers which in turn could reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. In conclusion this paper provides a more realistic and well-reasoned argument on the reduction of nuclear weapons by stating accurate information about the modern age that is post-cold war America and how far it’s advanced to the point where it has a lesser need for these weapons while also better informing the audience of the roles that nuclear weapons have on the world References
US Department of Defense. (2014). America Must Reduce Its Nuclear Arsenal and Guarantee
Limits on the Use of Nuclear Force. In D. Haugen (Ed.),
Opposing Viewpoints
.
War
. Greenhaven
Press. (Reprinted from Nuclear Posture Review Report, 2010,
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
April)
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010237284/OVIC?u=ivytech31&sid=bookmark-
OVIC&xid=6a62c672
Hughes, G. P. (2014). America Should Not Reduce Its Nuclear Arsenal. In D. Haugen
(Ed.),
Opposing Viewpoints
.
War
. Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from
U.S. News & World Report
,
2012, April 23)
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010237285/OVIC?u=ivytech31&sid=bookmark-
OVIC&xid=93eb783f