Nuclear Weapons and the Second World War

Since the obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons have captured the attention of social scientists and the public alike. Some argue that the world benefits from nuclear weapons, claiming that they prevent war. Skeptics do not share this view and worry that nuclear weapons will only intensify conflict. Unfortunately, most theories about the benefits of nuclear weapons await judgement, because history has yet to present enough hard evidence towards their confirmation or rejection. In the absence of concrete proof, thought experiments can be a useful tool to flesh out theories. By considering the hypothetical case in which nuclear weapons were present prior to the Second World War, this paper draws conclusions about the effect of nuclear weapons on the causes of war. First, analysis shows that nuclear weapons provide mutually assured destruction, balance militaries, facilitate cautious decisions and negotiations, and de-glorify militaristic perceptions of war, all of which may prevent war. Next, Hitler's role in starting WWII is examined by looking at his control over Germany, reluctance to negotiate, skewed ideology, and non-deterrable nature. Finally, it is argued that nuclear weapons could not have prevented conflict and instead may have intensified the Second World War.