Most countries spend large amount of money on weapons to defend themselves though they are not at war. Some believe those countries should spend the money to help poor countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Last year, the defense expenditure of the United States exceeds 200 billion US dollars. If half of that money were used to help the poor, we would see a vast increase in the quality of their life. Alas, most countries are lukewarm in their efforts to help the poor, which is most deplorable to me.
People around the world have a moral obligation to help each otehr. Even animals often do this. As civilized men, can we stand by and do nothing while our fellow creatures are struggling in misery? National defense is given priority in most countries, which is a clear indication of our mutual hostility towards each other -- we feel the need to guard and fight against one another. How ironic it is that instead of helping, we spent vast amount of money and resource on making sure that we will not be harmed by others. Granting some historical reasons, religious or ideological differences, human decency requires us to look after the interest of all people on earth, not jut that of ourselves.
What's more, the assistance given to other countries by us often proves beneficial to ourselves in the long run. Economic globalization and integration makes nations increasingly interdependent. Rarely can one country develop all by itself. Any nation relies on others for raw materials or markets for end products. It is in the interest of rich countries that poor nations achieve economic growth because the increased purchase power in those countries may in turn give a boost to world economy. Therefore, aiding the poor makes economic as well as moral sense.
In short, peace and development is certainly the theme of this century. Priority should be given to assisting the poor both at home and abroad rather than national defense.
Reference:
剑桥雅思写作高分范文
在京东购买：剑桥雅思写作高分范文
在亚马逊购买：剑桥雅思写作真题范文百篇