Michaelis1
Colton Michaelis
Professor Saul
English 1010
14 July 2012
Annotated Bibliography
In researching the issue of Iran and nuclear weapons, several aspects of the issue cameup
suchas how many countries around the world have tried to obtain nuclear weapons, the successes
stories and failed attempts. One of the issues that I really enjoyed is that as a country we need to
either take actions now to stop the spread of nuclear weapons throughout the world or we need to
be prepared for what could take place if countries like Iran obtained nuclear weapons and how
our safety could be at a huge risk. It becomes clear that we need to take the first step and slowly
disarm ourselves and then hopefully everyone else will do the same thing. I chose this issue of
nuclear weapons in Iran and around the world because I feel like we really need to do something
about it before something bad happens and I want to see what how others view the issue and
their feelings on what should be done.
Kroenig, Matthew. “Time to Attack Iran.” Epnet.com
Ephost, Web. June 2012
In the article, “Time to Attack Iran,” Matthew Kroenig discusses his feelings and views
on what the United States should do about Iran and their drive to become a nuclear Iran. Kroenig
says that for years now America has been debating whether or not they should attack Iran and
attempt to eliminate all its nuclear facilities. Kroenig notes that an attack on Iran could be worse
for the United States than it would be if they were able to achieve nuclear power due to the fact
Michaelis2
that it would only make things in the Middle East tenser. Kroenig goes to state the dangers of
deterrence and that for years of international pressures have failed to halt any of Iran’s attempts
to build a nuclear program, even when the Stuxnet computer worm attacked the control systems
in a Iranian facilities and that they were still able to recover quickly and press forward with its
nuclear program. Kroenig says that anytime would be a good time to attack Iran because the
United States could eliminate Iran’s nuclear facilities and hinder them from being able to achieve
nuclear advances again or slow the process way down. He points out that IAEA says that Iran is
fully committed to developing nuclear weapons, so if we don’t strike now and try to eliminate
their nuclear advances that were going to suffer later on.
The article is very good and well written. Matthew Kroenig has great credentials; he
serves as a Stanton Nuclear Security fellow at the council on foreign relations and the author of
“Exporting the bomb; Technology Transfer and the spread of Nuclear weapons.” The knowledge
that Matthew Kroenig has made him wants to inform us about the threats that the United States
could face if Iran and other countries achieve nuclear weapons. He also backs up the claims he
makes with statics and scenarios that could take place if we don’t do something about it.
Before I had read the article “Time to Attack Iran” I really had known idea about what
could really happen to the United States or the world if Iran obtained nuclear weapons and if
they were to fall into the wrong hands. This article helped me to find my research question
because it sparkled my interests on the whole topic of Iran and nuclear weapons in general. In
reading the article it helped me to think more about what Iran and other countries felt about
nuclear weapons, which led me to research both sides of the issue and helped me to come to a
better understanding of what’s really going on about nuclear weapons.
Michaelis3
Cohn, William. “Obama comes to Prague” Epnet.com
The Prague journal of central European affairs
Web. 5 July 2012
In the article “Obama comes to Prague” written by William a. Cohn discusses what
Obama says about nuclear disarmament and the increasing threat of nuclear weapons spreading
throughout the world. William says that “as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear
weapon, the united states has a moral responsibility to act.” William brings up that nuclear
weapons are unlike any other weapon because there is no legitimate purposes to use one expect
to violate international laws and to destroy life.He brings up that the U.S. bipartisan commission
on prevent of nuclear proliferation recently concluded that,” our margin of safety is shrinking,
not growing.” Williams says that Obama wants the abolition of all nuclear weapons and that
nuclear threats now include Al-Qaeda, the Taliban or other religious extremists and now that
India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons it makes me on high alert because of the unstable
economy’s and governments that they have.
I like how William states that as holders of 95% of the world’s nuclear weapons U.S. and
Russia need to get together and led the way in the disbarment of our own nuclear weapons. He
quotes that “we started it (by unleashing and using this force upon humanity) and we must end
it.”I thinkt the article is pretty good and brings up very good point on the nuclear threats going
on in the world. Williams is a member of the California and international bar association and is a
long term advocate for demilitarization and is a lecturer at the University of New York in
Prague. It is very well written because he uses many quotes and information that come from
people that know a lot more on the subject then he may know. It is very easy to understand and
it’s meant for all types of people.
Michaelis4
As I read the article “Obama comes to Prague” it brought to my attention that as a
country we need to get our act together and met with Russia and decide to disarm are nuclear
weapons and then hope that everyone else we follow right along, which in return would get rid of
nuclear weapons all together.
Sliverstein, Richard. Iran, Israel and the U.S. resolving Nuclear Impasses.”
Israel Journal of central European affairs, spring 2009 Web. 5 July 2012
The Article “Iran, Israel and the U.S. resolving the nuclear impasse” by Richard
Silverstein brings up his feelings about Iran having nuclear weapons and if it’s safe or not.
Richard talks to his friend Prof. Sahimi who says that there is no evidence that anyone has so far
that Iran intends to build a nuclear weapon but that they are pursing research that if they wanted
to they could create such a weapon. He brings up that no matter how deranged Iran’s current
regime is that their foreign policy is conducted totally differently and they know that if they were
to do something that the United States and Israel are right there ready to attack them and stop
anything from happening.” Iran itself has not pursued an offensive war in 275 years” so there’s
no intention of them starting now even if they did get a nuclear weapon.
Richard brings up a very good point that several of Iranian neighbors like Pakistan and
Russia have nuclear weapons and that Israel has warheads that could easily strike them. He states
that Iran is deeply worried about how instable Pakistan is within the country and how their
nuclear weapons could easily fall into the wrong hands. He brings up that countries like North
Korea having a nuclear weapon has protected them from outside regimes from coming in and if
they don’t have any nuclear weapons and if the United States doesn’t like what’s going that the
United States can change that very quickly like they did in Iraq.
Michaelis5
I really enjoyed the article, it’s very well written, and Richard seems to me to know what
he’stalking. He is a free-lance writer who publishes in comment is free, alter net, and Aljazeera.
Net, he contributed a chapter to a book a time to speak out. This article is perfect for anyone
wanting to understand what Iran view point on nuclear weapons is and how they feel about how
everything is going on.
Honestly before I read the article “Iran, Israel and the U.S. resolving the nuclear
Impasses”. I truly viewed Iran as kind of a bad guy in the world because I only looked at the
events of nuclear weapons from my point of view and not theirs. It’s pretty closely related to all
my articles but it brings up Iran may be feeling. This article brought to my attention that Iran
may have other ideas behind nuclear technology and not to just attack others.
Katz, J.J “Lessons learned from nonproliferation successes and failures.”Epnet.com
Rutledge, Web. 5 July 2012
In the Article “lessons learned from Nonproliferation Successes and Failures” by J.J.
Katz discusses the successes and failures that came with them banning the progress of nuclear
weapons testing. Katz explains that nonproliferation was meant to try to prevent threating
countries from threating countries from developing nuclear weapons. However countries like
Libya, North Korea and Iran were able to conceal their testing facilities for many years which
according to Katz are the reason why treats like the Comprehensive nuclear testing ban treaty
and Fissile cut-off treaty not verifiable. Katz says that not all nonproliferation efforts have been
failures and that they can be identified in 3 ways one by military intrusive, two reconciliation
between former adversaries and three a combination of democratic revolution and for dominant
power to guarantee security and take away a need for a nuclear force.
Michaelis6
Katz discusses some of the reasons why nonproliferation failed. Some countries
researched nuclear weapons claiming that they are afraid of an adversary and they tried to use it
to gain a strategic advantage over other countries.
This article is very interesting and very well written. Katz seems to know a lot about the
success and failures that countries faced during attempts to obtain nuclear weapons. Katz has lots
of tables and figures on all the countries that have been successes and failures and it showed how
they failed and how they succeeded. The article shows that obtaining nuclear weapons isn’t
always as easy as it may seem and that many countries have tried to failed and many have
succeeded.
Before I read the article “Lessons Learned from nonproliferation success and failures.” I
never knew that so many countries around the world have made attempts to obtain nuclear
weapons. It fits perfectly with the rest of my articles because it brings up that other countries
have failed to obtain nuclear weapons and maybe we should sit back and see what happens in
Iran but it also shows that countries have succeeded with getting a nuclear weapon and it brings
up the idea to get rid of the them completely.
In my research on the issue of Iran and Nuclear weapons throughout the world, I’ve
learned that there are many things that are going on that could put an end to nuclear weapons
around the world and also many reasons why countries have nuclear weapons. All my sources
come to the conclusion that nuclear weapons need to be stopped and that no one around the
world should have them, and it would make the world and much safer and friendlier place. I feel
comfortable to say that we need to find ways to stop the spread of nuclear weapons throughout
the world or someday all of us will pay the price for it.
Michaelis7
Synthesis of Sources
In the article “time to Attack Iran” by Matthew Kroenig, he believes that even after years
of pressure from the united states and other international powers that it hasn’t done anything to
stop or hinder Iran from moving forward with its nuclear program and that other nations are
losing their faith in the U.S. that we’re not going to do anything about it. So countries have
started to take things into their own hands,” some regions are doubting the U.S. resolve to stop
the programs are shifting their allegiance to Tehran. Others have begun to discuss launching their
own nuclear initiatives to counter a possible Iranian bomb.” In the article “Obama Comes to
Prague” by William Cohn, he agrees that we need to step up and do something about the
spreading of nuclear weapons throughout the world.” As the only nation to have used a nuclear
weapon, the united States has a moral responsibility to act.” As a country we need to take the
first steps to stop the spread of nuclear weapons in the world. The article “lessons Learned from
Nonproliferation Successes and Failures” by J.J. Katz agrees with both of the articles in that we
should step up and make the first steps like we’ve done in the pass. Katz’s shows a table of the
success stories and how they managed to prevent that country from obtain a nuclear weapon,
some of the countries he shows are Switzerland and that they vowed to be neutral and in return
the United States guaranteed them security. The United States did this with many countries like
Sweden, South Korea and even Taiwan. With other countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria there
was some kind of an attack that took place, like a bombing of reactors or an occupation force like
when the United States did with Iraq. It just goes to show that making the first step to stop the
spread of nuclear weapons has been successful in the past.”
Michaelis8
The article by Richard Silverstein “Iran, Israel and the U.S. Resolving their Nuclear
Impasse” disagrees with the other three articles. He believes that threes really no proof that Iran
currently intends to build a nuclear weapon but that they want the ability to make one if they feel
like their national security is at risk. He says that Japan decided to follow that same path in the
1960s, it has no nuclear weapons but if it should feel under pressure from one of its neighbors or
be attacked by them that they would have to the ability to create such a weapon and use it for
their safety. “Yet you don’t hear the world complain about this.” The only reason why it’s such a
big deal its Iran and that the area in and around them is unstable compared to other nations
around the world. In the article “Iran, Israel and the U.S resolving the nuclear impasse,” by
Richard Silverstein states that Iranians have taken notice of countries like North Korea and how
since they have developed a nuclear weapon that it has protected them from attacks from other
nations and regime changes, he says that Iran hasn’t pursued an offensive war in 275 years and
so they won’t start a war with other countries like Israel.” Prof Lustick also argues that most
Israeli security experts do not predict an Iranian attack.” The article “Lessons learned from
nonproliferation successes and failures” by J.J. Katz goes to agree that Iran could want to have a
nuclear weapon for protection and not for an offensive means. He states most countries go
nuclear go nuclear for strategic reasons and for fear that other countries around them may use a
nuclear weapon on them. He brings up a good point that there is no evidence that the countries
that claim to a nuclear weapon have ever tested them to see if they work at all. “The purpose of
developing nuclear weapons was to strengthen their possessor against its rivals and enemies.” So
Iran could be developing a nuclear weapons for protecting themselves and to also scary away
other countries from trying anything. “Time to Attack Iran” by Matthew Kroenig disagrees with
the first two articles. He believes that if the United States doesn’t attack Iran it will be bad later
Michaelis9
on, but if they do attack and it be successful that it can reduce or even get rid of any fears
that we have about a nuclear attack and more importantly it could make other nations not want to
start their own nuclear weapons program in the areas around them. “Strengthen global
nonproliferation by demonstrating that it will use military force to prevent nuclear weapons.
In the article, “Obama Comes to Prague,” by William A. Cohen, believes that the
increasing number of countries with a nuclear weapon and countries like Iran wanting a nuclear
weapon is only going to continue to increase due to the countries that have nuclear weapons and
how they have failed to disarm their own nuclear weapons. A former UN weapons inspector Dr.
Hans Blix says, “so long as any state has nuclear weapons, others will want them. So long as any
such weapon remains, there is a risk that they will one day be used by design or by accident. And
any such would be catastrophic.” In his article, “Lessons Learned from Nonproliferation
Successes and Failures,” by J.J. Katz agrees that countries like Iran will continue to want a
nuclear weapon as long as countries continue to fail to disarm their nuclear weapons. “A
necessary condition for a world free of nuclear weapons is a world free of dictatorships and
threating relationships between states.” Every democracy has developed a nuclear weapon
because it felt threatened by a dictatorship. Richard Silverstein agrees with both of the articles in
his article, “Iran, Israel and the U.S. Resolving the Nuclear Impasses,” He points out that Iran
wants a nuclear weapon because it feels threaten by other countries around them like Pakistan
and Israel. They don’t want a nuclear weapon for offensive reasons but for the feeling of security
from other nations around them.
Blog
Michaelis10
When I was searching for a topic for my final paper, there were many things that came to
my mind, but there was only really one topic that stood out to me the most. That topic was the
spreading of nuclear weapons throughout the world but more importantly was the Middle East
and the country of Iran. The threat of a nuclear attack has been around since we used the bomb
on japan and all throughout the cold war were everyone was on edge for what could have easily
been a nuclear war, with the events that took place in Iraq and Iran developing a nuclear weapons
has brought many old issues back up again. I wanted to search and try to out any solutions to the
problem or if there was any of preventing it from taking place.
I was looking for articles that brought up different points of views on the subject,
so that I could come to a better understanding of the whole issue of nuclear weapons and the
spread of them throughout the world and in place like Iran. I thought to that the article “Time to
Attack Iran,” by Matthew Kroenig would be a great starting point for me. he says that an attack
on Iran to destroy or hinder their nuclear advances could be extremely bad for the United States
and make things more on edge in the Middle East but for years now Iran has been receiving
pressure from the united states and other international powers to stop their programs but all of
that pressure has done nothing to stop them from moving forward with their nuclear program.
Kroenig says that “if we don’t strike now and try to eliminate their nuclear advances that were
going to suffer for it later on.” I agree that we should at least attempt to stop Iran from obtain a
nuclear weapon, because if we don’t do anything and they do obtain a nuclear weapon they may
not use it against us or anyone us but the whole area in and around them is completely unstable
and it could easily fall into the hands of a group of radicals that hate the United States and they
would use it on us. At the same time if we do attack and we don’t stop anything for happing, we
could face a lot of retaliations from them and other groups around the world. I learned a lot from
Michaelis11
this article it brought to my attention what could happen if we don’t do anything about nuclear
weapons and what could happen if we do but an end to the spread of nuclear weapons.
The article “Obama Comes to Prague,” written by William A. Cohn, is another article
about the need to eliminate nuclear weapons in the world. He brings up a good point that a
nuclear weapon is unlike any kind of weapon, there meant to destroy life. He states that the U.S.
bipartisan commission on prevention of nuclear proliferation recently concluded “that our
margin of safety is shrinking, not growing.” That goes on along perfectly with the first article
that we need to do something about it and not just sit around and see what happens. He brings up
that 95% of the wordlist nuclear weapons are in the united states and Russia and that we need to
get together and make the first steps to disarm are own nuclear weapons. I totally agree with that
statement I think that if we were both able to start to get rid of our nuclear weapons that other
countries would see what we’re doing and they would do the something, if we don’t do that we
need to make a huge offensive move and stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
Richard Silverstein brings a different viewpoint to the issue, in his article “Iran, Israel and
the U.S Resolving the Nuclear Impasse.” He discusses the viewpoint of Iran and what other
countries may be feeling about nuclear weapons. Silverstein brings up a lot of very good points
that I would have never have thought of before I read the article. He says that there’s no evidence
that Iran intends to build a nuclear weapon but that there just pursing that technology for just in
case they are attacked or feel threatened by another country that they would be able to defend
themselves. I really like he brings up other countries like North Korea and Pakistan and how they
have nuclear weapons protect from other nations that may want to control them. I full heartedly
agree with that statement because if you do have a nuclear weapon no one really messes with
you, but I still think that because of how unstable that whole area is that a nuclear weapon could
Michaelis12
easily end up in some crazy person or groups hands and then all of us would have a huge
problem on are hands.
“Lessons Learned from Nonproliferation Successes and Failures,” by J.J. Katz brings to
the table more of a neutral stance on the issue of nuclear weapons and the spreading of them
throughout the world. He brings up a table of a bunch of information on both some success
stories and failures from when someone stepped in and stopped that country from achieving
nuclear weapons and those countries that obtained a nuclear weapon.
As I’ve read and ponder about the issue of Iran wanting a nuclear weapon and the spread
of nuclear weapons throughout the world for a couple of weeks now, I have learned a lot of new
things and have gained a lot of information from the sources that I gathered. The issue is real and
it will continue to grow unless we do something about it. I learned that countries may want a
nuclear weapon for their own protection and not for offensive purposes but I have to agree with
the first two articles that we can’t sit back and see what happens in the world and in Iran because
it’s not going to be good for us if we don’t act. I personally think that we need to attack Iran and
stop their process and make an example out of them to the whole world that well do anything to
stop the spread of nuclear weapons throughout the world, and Iran is the first step to do that.
Reflective Writing
As I look back on all the time and effort that I put into writing my issue exploration, I
found out a lot of new tools to help me with writing my paper. One tool that I thought was very
helpful was searching for articles on my topic using the databases at the school. This helped me
to find articles that were perfect for my topic and the articles that are contained on the database
are quality articles, I also found that doing the synthesis of sources helped me out a lot with the
Michaelis13
writing process, by breakdown each article and finding points within the articles that agree and
disagree with each other, I believed that it helped me to gain a better understanding of my issue
and it made me enjoy writing about my issue. The major thing that helped me with the writing
process with my essay was doing the research. The way my teacher explained the project to the
class and how she showed us through workshops and all the examples that she gave to us, I think
that they really opened a lot of new doors and ideas into my life and my ability to do quality
research went up and my work greatly improved. The assignment of the Issue Exploration and
the issue that I decided to write on greatly changed my view of the world around me, I feel like I
have a better understanding of the issue I wrote on and just not what I’ve been told. It made me
try and see things from both sides of the issue. I think the final project demonstrates a lot about
my learning process in English 1010, my professor throughout the semester gave us the tools a
little at a time and we would receive feedback on what we could do to improve it, then she had
us combine all the tools that we learned in English 1010 into the final project. I personally think
that it made my writing ability a lot better than it was at the beginning of the semester and my
confidence when up a bunch when it came to writing a paper. The final project and my
performance on this paper demonstrate everything the community college wants their students to
be able to do. First I had to use the schools database to find and narrow down articles for the
issue that I wanted to write on, it helped my literacy because the articles were written by well
educated people and by reading them I felt more comfortable when it came to talking about my
issue. When we were in groups it helped me to explain the articles more in depth because I
actually understood what was going on. My final project shows a lot about my progress in
English 1010. I feel more confident when I hand in rough drafts of my papers to be peered
reviewed and I feel that I give better feedback on other people’s paper that I read for pre-review.
Michaelis14
I think that my writing structure has greatly improved. I feel that my sentence structure, grammar
and citations have improved since the beginning of the class and my structure of a paper has
greatly improved. I really enjoyed the class and doing the work for my final project