Grade 1 Speech Topics


| Back | Index | Next |

 [255]   [2011-2 A] Should countries have the right to possess chemical and biological weapons?
Needless to say, countries should NOT have the right to possess chemical and biological weapons.
The reason is clear, because these weapons can cause untold casualties and environmental destruction. Not only soldiers but also innocent people like civilians including children and women fall victims to the weapons. Also, the environment will be damaged too. The trees are dead, animals are killed, rivers and lakes are contaminated, and the soil loses its fertility. What's left there is just bare land without any creatures, which takes years to recover.
 
Also, the side-effect in the aftermath of the destruction is huge. The people affected by the weapon suffer from numerous diseases such as cancer or pneumonia that will last for the rest of their lives. And their children and great children will suffer too. For example, biological weapons that were used in Vietnam War brought children with abnormalities. Two children with one body, or children with some body parts missing... The result of the use of biological weapons is just as terrible and it's no way to justify.
 
That's why I'm strongly against it. Chemical and biological weapons are just as dangerous as nuclear weapons, and the efforts to reduce the number of biological weapons should be made as much as the efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons.
 
[Points]
 
[Pros]
 
1. a deterrent to a war
 
2. future technological advancement ( for peaceful purposes )
 
[Cons]
 
1. destruction to humans ( people with discrimination )
2. destruction to the environment ( plants / animals / rivers ... )
 
3. the aftermath of the use
( an increasing number of cancer patients / children with abnormalities )
update:
2024/01/04



HOME

c1304015@jcom.zaq.ne.jpHere is my email address.Contact Me!!
inserted by FC2 system