MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Nagasaki’

Truman’s War Crimes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on August 8, 2020

Keep in mind that there is nothing in the principles of warfare that required Truman and Roosevelt to demand the unconditional surrender of Japan (or Germany). Wars can be — and often are — ended with terms of surrender. Both presidents were willing to sacrifice countless people on both sides of the conflict to attain their demand for unconditional surrender.

https://www.fff.org/2020/08/05/trumans-war-crimes-at-hiroshima-and-nagasaki/

by

This month marks the 75h anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While proponents of the bombings have long justified them on the basis that they shortened World War II, the fact is that they were war crimes. The only reason why President Truman and the pilots who dropped the bombs were not prosecuted as war criminals is because the United States ended up winning the war.

It has long been pointed out that Japan had expressed a willingness to surrender. The only condition was that the Japanese emperor not be abused or executed.

President Truman refused to agree to that condition. Like his predecessor Franklin Roosevelt, Truman demanded “unconditional surrender.”

That was why Japan continued fighting. Japanese officials naturally assumed that U.S. officials were going to do some very bad things to their emperor, including torture and execution. In the minds of Japanese officials, why else would the United States not be willing to agree to that one condition, especially given that it would have meant the end of the war?

The dark irony is that Truman ended up accepting the condition anyway, only after he pulverized the people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear bombs.

In an excellent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times today entitled “U.S. Leaders Knew We Didn’t Have to Drop Atomic Bombs on Japan to Win the War. We Did It Anyway” the authors point out:

Seven of the United States’ eight five-star Army and Navy officers in 1945 agreed with the Navy’s vitriolic assessment. Generals Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and Henry “Hap” Arnold and Admirals William Leahy, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King, and William Halsey are on record stating that the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both.

Keep in mind that there is nothing in the principles of warfare that required Truman and Roosevelt to demand the unconditional surrender of Japan (or Germany). Wars can be — and often are — ended with terms of surrender. Both presidents were willing to sacrifice countless people on both sides of the conflict to attain their demand for unconditional surrender.

But Truman’s unconditional surrender demand is not why his action constituted a war crime. This bombings constituted war crimes because they targeted non-combatants, including children, women, and seniors with death as a way to bring about an unconditional surrender of the Japanese government.

It has long been considered a rule of warfare that armies fight armies in war. They don’t target non-combatants. The intentional killing of non-combatants is considered a war crime.

A good example of this principle involved the case of Lt. William Calley in the Vietnam War. Calley and his men shot and killed numerous non-combatants in a South Vietnamese village. The victims included women and children.

The U.S military prosecuted Calley as a war criminal — and rightly so. While the deaths of non-combatants oftentimes occurs incidentally to wartime operations, it is a war crime to specifically target them for death.

Truman justified his action by arguing that the bombings shortened the war and, therefore, saved the lives of thousands of American soldiers and Japanese people if an invasion had become necessary. It is a justification that has been repeated ever since by proponents of the bombings.

There are two big problems with that justification, however.

First, an invasion would not have been necessary. All that Truman had to do was to accept Japan’s only condition for surrender, and that would have meant the end of the war, without the deaths that would have come with an invasion and that did come with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

More important, the fact that lives of American soldiers would have been saved is not a moral or legal justification for targeting non-combatants. If Calley had maintained at his trial that his actions were intended to shorten the Vietnam War, his defense would have been rejected. He would have still be convicted for war crimes.

Soldiers die in war. That is the nature of war. To kill women, children, and seniors in the hopes of saving the lives of soldiers by shortening the war is not only a war crime, it is also an act of extreme cowardice. If an invasion of Japan would have become necessary to win the war, thereby resulting in the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers, then that’s just the way that war works.

It’s also worth pointing out that Japan never had any intention of invading and conquering the United States. The only reason that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor was in the hope of knocking out the U.S. Pacific fleet, not as a prelude to invading Hawaii or the continental United States but simply to prevent the U.S. from interfering with Japan’s efforts to secure oil in the Dutch East Indies.

And why was Japan so desperate for oil as to initiate war against the United States? Because President Franklin Roosevelt had imposed a highly effective oil embargo on Japan as a way to maneuver the Japanese into attacking the United States.

FDR’s plan, of course, succeeded, which ended up costing the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and millions of Japanese citizens, including those at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


This post was written by:

 

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fr. George Zabelka – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 8, 2020

If Zabelka eventually came around to the “right side” of history and Church teaching, then why is he not considered some kind of hero? Why do hardly any Catholics know about him? Why I am, literally, the only Christian in the world using the hashtag “#GeorgeZabelka” on Twitter on the 75th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bombs?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/ellen-finnigan/george-zabelka/

By

Why have I, a cradle Catholic, learned more about the Prince of Peace, the evils of war, and the lies of the government from your website than from my own Church?

In 2007, you published “A Military Chaplain Repents,” an interview that Fr. Emmanuel McCarthy did with Fr. George Zabelka in the late 1970s. Fr. Zabelka served as the Catholic chaplain for the group that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No Catholic magazine or newspaper was interested in publishing this interview at the time. It wouldn’t have seen the light of day if Sojourners, a Protestant publication, had not published it in 1980.

In 2005, you published “Blessing the Bombs,” a speech Fr. Zabelka gave at a Pax Christi conference in August 1985. By this point, George’s story had become internationally known, but even after a Hollywood-quality documentary was made about him in 1988 (“The Reluctant Prophet”), no American t.v. station, either Catholic or secular, was interested in televising it.

Whereas Maj. Gen. Charles W. Sweeney, a Catholic who flew the B-29 that dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, never doubted that he did the right thing (it should be noted: as a 25-year-old), Fr. Zabelka did a complete “about-face” as he called it. He said: “I was there, and I was wrong.” Which one of these men do you think was the subject of many interviews and feature articles that would appear in national publications on various anniversaries of the bombing?

This week I had the honor of interviewing Fr. McCarthy on my podcast about his good friend, George Zabelka. Your readers might be interested in hearing the “inside story” of Fr. Zabelka’s conversion, and how Fr. McCarthy ended up meeting him, about the rocky start to their relationship, and some of the fruits that came from Fr. Zabelka’s work for peace toward the end of his life.

I see many Catholics this week reassuring themselves and others on Twitter that “the Church has always condemned the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians,” as if to say: “It’s all good. We have nothing to repent for. We were in the right.”

A more honest look at history might lead one to wonder, if this is true, why so many Christians participated in the indiscriminate slaughtering of civilians — and without a second thought. One cannot overestimate the importance of George Zabelka’s testimony;  but equally important I think is the story of how his testimony was, one can only conclude after listening to the podcast, deliberately suppressed, minimized, and ignored by not only the mainstream media but the mainstream Catholic Church.

If Zabelka eventually came around to the “right side” of history and Church teaching, then why is he not considered some kind of hero? Why do hardly any Catholics know about him? Why I am, literally, the only Christian in the world using the hashtag “#GeorgeZabelka” on Twitter on the 75th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bombs?

Fr. McCarthy always says that Jesus uses the verb “do” more than any other verb in the New Testament. Thank you for all you’ve done to spread the word of Fr. George Zabelka’s witness, for not letting his story be memory-holed. If I could, I’d give you one of the buttons that Fr. Zabelka use to pass out to people by the thousands before he died.

 

 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The US bombed Japan in 1945 to demonstrate its power to the USSR. Intimidation, NOT deterrence was, is and always will be the goal — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on August 7, 2020

The fact of the matter is Truman’s inner circle, including Secretary of State James Byrnes and Secretary of War Henry Stimson, were in favor of dropping the atomic bomb on Japanese cities not so much because it would shorten the current war with Japan, but primarily because it would help deter a future war with the Soviet Union

Byrnes believed that “Russia might be more manageable” in a post-war reality shaped not by the theoretical possibility of an atomic bomb, but the demonstrated destructive capacity of the new weapon. As General Leslie Groves, the military director of the Manhattan Project that produced the two American bombs, relayed to the scientists involved, “the whole purpose of this project was to subdue the Russians.”

The fact that the US continues to design and deploy nuclear weapons based on their ‘usability’ should send a chill down the neck of every American citizen, and indeed of the neck of every citizen of the world.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/497209-intimidation-deterrence-nuclear-bombing-japan/

Scott Ritter
Scott Ritter

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘SCORPION KING: America’s Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.’ He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

 

As the world reflects on the decision by the US to drop two atomic bombs on Japan at the end of World War II, the reality is that the US nuclear enterprise remains the greatest threat to world peace.

Seventy-five years ago this week, two American B-29 ‘Superfortress’ bombers departed Tinian Island, in the northernmost part of the Mariana Islands, some 1,500 miles south of Tokyo, armed with the world’s newest and most horrific weapon: the atomic bomb. On August 6, a B-29 nicknamed the ‘Enola Gay’ dropped a single bomb containing 64 kilograms of highly enriched uranium over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The bomb, nicknamed ‘Little Boy,’ detonated with the force of 15 kilotons of TNT. At least 66,000 people were killed outright, with another 69,000 wounded, many of whom subsequently died of their injuries.

Two days later a second B-29, nicknamed the ‘Bockscar,’ dropped a bomb containing 6.4 kilograms of plutonium over the city of Nagasaki. This weapon, nicknamed ‘Fat Man,’ detonated with a force of 21 kilotons, killing some 39,000 Japanese outright and wounding another 25,000, most of whom, like those injured in Hiroshima, later died from their wounds.

Also on rt.com John Pilger: Another Hiroshima is coming – unless we stop it now American historians have struggled with the morality of dropping weapons that could destroy a city and its population in one mighty blast. Over the years, a consensus has been reached that justifies the horror of using the atomic bomb on the grounds that it helped shorten the war with Japan and, in doing so, saved hundreds of thousands of American lives that would have been lost in any invasion of the main Japanese islands, along with the lives of millions of Japanese, who would have died defending their homeland.

The problem with this narrative is that it provides an inaccurate picture of what really transpired. Certainly, the math regarding expected casualties in the case of an invasion of Japan is factually accurate, as far as estimates go. However, the reality was that Japan was on the cusp of surrendering and, had the US offered conditional terms replicating the post-war arrangement eventually reached by General MacArthur (the retention of the Imperial family, and a modicum of Japanese self-governance), there is every reason to believe that the Japanese would have surrendered without the US resorting to a costly campaign of conquest.

RT

The fact of the matter is Truman’s inner circle, including Secretary of State James Byrnes and Secretary of War Henry Stimson, were in favor of dropping the atomic bomb on Japanese cities not so much because it would shorten the current war with Japan, but primarily because it would help deter a future war with the Soviet Union.

Byrnes believed that “Russia might be more manageable” in a post-war reality shaped not by the theoretical possibility of an atomic bomb, but the demonstrated destructive capacity of the new weapon. As General Leslie Groves, the military director of the Manhattan Project that produced the two American bombs, relayed to the scientists involved, “the whole purpose of this project was to subdue the Russians.

Also on rt.com US is stuck in Cold War thinking; Plan to spend Russia & China ‘into oblivion’ in arms race will bankrupt only America This distinction is critical to understanding the role played by nuclear weapons in American nuclear posture and policy today. Doctrine, like organizations and people, are heavily influenced by the circumstances of their birth. There is a huge distinction between the calculation required to justify using a weapon for the purpose of shortening a war and saving lives, and that used to seek to intimidate a potential future opponent by demonstrating the destructive capability of a weapon through the annihilation of two cities, and their respective populations, that otherwise need not have been targeted for destruction.

Americans like to embrace the narrative of the use of the two atomic bombs that targeted Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a perverse act of humanitarianism – we had to kill hundreds of thousands in order to save millions. Seen in this light, the continued possession of nuclear weapons by the United States is a necessary evil, as their existence helps prevent, through deterrence, the future employment of these terrible weapons of mass destruction.

But when viewed through a lens that reflects the reality of the genesis of the atomic bomb – that it was a force of intimidation the power of which had to be demonstrated through the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, most of whom were civilians who otherwise would have survived – the atomic bomb and its progeny were no longer a necessary evil, but rather pure evil personified.

The United States has long struggled with the need to balance the notion of ‘war made easy’ through the existence of nuclear weapons and the temptation to use them that such a philosophy promotes, and the harsh reality of retaliation at the hands of other nuclear powers should it be inclined to use them. The fact that, over the years, the US has been tempted to use nuclear weapons to resolve difficult non-nuclear conflicts (Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq come to mind) only underscores the reality that intimidation, and not deterrence, is their principal value.

The fact that the US continues to design and deploy nuclear weapons based on their ‘usability’ should send a chill down the neck of every American citizen, and indeed of the neck of every citizen of the world. This is especially so now, given the current ambivalence of the US to the kind of arms control that previously helped reduce the risk of inadvertent nuclear conflict. In the past 20 years, the US has withdrawn from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force Treaty, and is on the cusp of allowing the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty to expire without a replacement.

Instead of doubling down on trying to revive arms control, the US seems focused on flexing its muscle through the deployment of new ‘small yield’ warheads on submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). It’s also ‘up-warheading’ and flight-testing Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with three multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles – despite the fact the operational Minuteman III force is deployed with only a single warhead.

American politicians and military planners may seek to mollify a worried world by insisting that these actions, and others like it, are meant only to bolster the deterrent capability of the US nuclear enterprise. But the world should not be fooled. Seventy-five years ago, the United States murdered hundreds of thousands of Japanese for the sole purpose of seeking to intimidate Russia. A recent exercise involving the newly deployed ‘low-yield’ SLBM, in which the Secretary of Defense practiced the weapons-release procedures in a scenario involving the targeting of Russian forces in Europe, must be viewed in the shadow of this history. Intimidation, not deterrence, was, is and always will be the driving force behind America’s nuclear arsenal. Like any schoolyard bully, the concern isn’t if the US will use these weapons, but when.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Evil Killing by the US Relies on Willful Indifference – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 7, 2019

Truman and his advisors lied to the American public, and withheld the information that Japan offered to surrender much in advance of the bombings.

How can a more informed citizenry continue to hide their heads in the sand, and worship the nation state apparatus and its agents of force in the military? This is a travesty, and exposes the success achieved by the elites to brainwash the public into supporting any kind of butchery and mass murder under the guise that they are protecting the nation from non-existent monsters from afar.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/08/gary-d-barnett/evil-killing-by-the-u-s-relies-on-willful-indifference/

By

This week marks another horrible anniversary of the two single largest terrorist acts ever perpetrated by any nation against mankind. That nation was the United States, and its victims were Japanese civilians. Hiroshima was bombed on August 6th, and Nagasaki was bombed on August 9th, 1945. Over 200,000 innocent people, mostly women and children, were immediately obliterated from the face of the earth for a lie. Many tens of thousands more have died since that time due to that murderous event.

How was it possible that hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were burned alive by U.S. atomic bombs, and their cities destroyed, while the U.S. masses remained apathetic to their plight? That apathy remains in place even today.

There is no less guilt for those who do nothing to stop evil acts than there is for those who commit them. Indifference is a most vile trait of human existence, but indifference toward the mass starvation, torture, and murder of innocents for political purposes may be the worst of all.

Indifference is the opposite of love, it is the opposite of good, and it is the opposite of anything of value. It is worse than hate. Apathy in the face of depravity has become common among many around the world, but especially so in this make-believe land of the free called America. This attitude of emptiness breeds despair, but it is important to remember that the evildoers among us can only succeed in their efforts of madness so long as those watching remain silent and do nothing.

Those heinous acts of extreme violence and death like the bombing of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki should be remembered so that it never happens again. But it does happen over and over, as this country’s ruling class and its military industrial complex continue to murder innocents every day. Truman and his advisors lied to the American public, and withheld the information that Japan offered to surrender much in advance of the bombings. In other words, the bombings were the premeditated murder of innocent women and children just to advance a political agenda.

I have been to both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and studied what happened there. My wife was raised in Kokura, Japan and her family still resides there. Kokura was the second target for the atomic bomb, but was passed over after multiple attempts, which failed due to adverse weather conditions. Nagasaki was the alternate bombsite on the 9th, and was mercilessly destroyed.

Those responsible for that carnage were evil monsters, and the stated plan was to only bomb civilian cities and targets, cities that were unscathed by previous bombings, so that the massive destruction could be calculated and measured. This was purposeful wickedness beyond the imagination of any decent and moral human being. The elected rulers of America were allowed to do the things they did with total immunity, and with the blessing of the public at large.

Today, much more is known about the intent of the political class and its elitist controllers, but it seems as if there is much more apathy today than at anytime in the past. How can this be? How can a more informed citizenry continue to hide their heads in the sand, and worship the nation state apparatus and its agents of force in the military? This is a travesty, and exposes the success achieved by the elites to brainwash the public into supporting any kind of butchery and mass murder under the guise that they are protecting the nation from non-existent monsters from afar. Societal weakness at this level deserves no respect or admiration whatsoever. It deserves only contempt. There is no excuse for such complicity in acts of war. The truth that must be accepted is that it is not just the government that should be blamed for all its heinous acts, but that each and every citizen who stands silent in the face of that evil committed in their name is fully responsible as well.

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were but two unconscionable acts of carnage in a horrible war that saw tens of millions die for the benefit of the powerbrokers that rule the world. But those events solidified in the minds of the weak masses a tolerance for the unspeakable, and a total disregard for humanity. The acceptance of such brazen acts as these set in motion a collective coldness that has allowed for a future of unlimited brutality.

The people of this country who value peace must rise up and fight against the continued slaughter of innocents in order to regain any sanity. Those who do not speak out to force a stop to these aggressive wars and killing, those who continue to blindly support the status quo, will be as guilty as those who prosecute war. They should be left with only shame and humiliation.

Be seeing you

Terror Banner Atomic Skulls (860009050) Banner - Rigeshop

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Survey: Americans Have Remarkably Ignorant Attitude Toward Nukes And North Korea – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on June 28, 2019

“Most Americans have been taught that using atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was justified because the bombings ended the war in the Pacific, thereby averting a costly U.S. invasion of Japan,” reads an excellent 2016 LA Times article on this subject by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznik. “This erroneous contention finds its way into high school history texts still today.”

In reality, the sole purpose of dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was not to end the war, but to show the rest of the world in general and the Soviets in particular that the United States had both the capability and the savagery to wipe out any city in the world with a single bomb. The war, in fact, had already been won, and the Japanese were already on the brink of surrender as the fearsome Soviet forces entered into the war in the Pacific

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/06/26/survey-americans-have-remarkably-ignorant-attitude-toward-nukes-and-north-korea/

Half of the responders to an innovative new survey of 3,000 Americans conducted by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the British research firm YouGov reported that they would support a nuclear strike against North Korea if it tested a long-range missile capable of reaching the continental United States. A third said they’d actually prefer such a strike over other hypothetical responses.

“For example, while ‘only’ 33 percent of the US public prefer a US preventive nuclear strike that would kill 15,000 North Koreans, 50 percent approve,” the report reads.

The study found little change in preference for a preemptive nuclear strike whether the hypothetical scenario offered to respondents entailed the death of 15,000 North Korean civilians or one million. Preferences for a preemptive strike only dropped when the hypothetical scenario reduced the probability of success (meaning elimination of North Korea’s nuclear retaliatory capabilities) was reduced from ninety to fifty percent.

The survey found a large knowledge deficit in responders regarding nuclear weapons, with a majority reporting an unrealistic amount of confidence in both the US military’s ability to eliminate all of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal in a preemptive strike and in its ability to shoot down North Korean missiles using current missile defense systems. This inaccurate perspective was significantly higher among Trump supporters.

While the study found that a majority of Americans would prefer to de-escalate against North Korea if given the choice, a jarring number of them would be willing to use nuclear weapons at the drop of a hat, and believe it’s possible to do so at relatively little risk to Americans.

“As we have previously found, the US public exhibits only limited aversion to nuclear weapons use and a shocking willingness to support the killing of enemy civilians,” write the report’s authors.

And really, why would we expect anything else? After all, Americans are taught the lie since they are children that their nation, the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons, did so with the goal of bringing a quick and painless end to a horrible world war. Like so much else, this ultimately boils down to the effects of propaganda.

“Most Americans have been taught that using atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was justified because the bombings ended the war in the Pacific, thereby averting a costly U.S. invasion of Japan,” reads an excellent 2016 LA Times article on this subject by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznik. “This erroneous contention finds its way into high school history texts still today.”

In reality, the sole purpose of dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was not to end the war, but to show the rest of the world in general and the Soviets in particular that the United States had both the capability and the savagery to wipe out any city in the world with a single bomb. The war, in fact, had already been won, and the Japanese were already on the brink of surrender as the fearsome Soviet forces entered into the war in the Pacific. The narrative that the use of nuclear bombs was a tragic but necessary means to end World War II is a lie that the US has used its cultural hegemony to circulate around the world, much like the lie that America was mostly responsible for Germany’s defeat and not the USSR.

I always get a lot of pushback from Americans when I point to this, not because I don’t have facts on my side but because it’s so glaringly different from the dominant narratives that Americans are spoon fed in school. If you don’t believe me, read the aforementioned LA Times article titled “Bombing Hiroshima changed the world, but it didn’t end WWII“, or this article from The Nation, or this one from Mises Institute.

Seriously, read the articles if this is upsetting you. This is an established fact to which contemporary generals at the time have attested. The uncomfortable feeling you’re experiencing upon reading this is called cognitive dissonance. It’s what learning you’ve been lied to your whole life feels like.

This report on the American public’s widespread ignorance of and indifference to the consequences of nuclear weapons use comes shortly after the US Joint Chiefs of Staff briefly published and then removed from public access an update on their position on the use of nukes which contains the alarming line, “Using nuclear weapons could create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability. Specifically, the use of a nuclear weapon will fundamentally change the scope of a battle and create conditions that affect how commanders will prevail in conflict.”

So the people responsible for forming America’s nuclear strategies believe using nuclear weapons is not just acceptable, but potentially beneficial. The mass media have been completely ignoring this horrifying revelation, and the public are too awash in disinformation to do anything about it themselves.

Anyone who believes it’s acceptable to use nuclear weapons for any other reason than retaliation against another nuclear attack shouldn’t be allowed to operate heavy machinery, much less participate in the formation of nuclear strategy for the most powerful military force in the history of civilization. The correct response to North Korea having nuclear retaliatory capabilities is the same as the response to any other nuclear power: leave them alone. The narrative that North Korea’s leadership is likely to launch an unprovoked attack is exactly as baseless and moronic as the narratives about Iraq or Iran launching an unprovoked attack. It’s not a thing.

As tensions continue to escalate between nuclear powers around the world while the faltering US empire becomes increasingly desperate to maintain its global hegemony, human extinction via nuclear annihilation is just as real a possibility as it was at the height of the last Cold War.

But it isn’t just the use of nuclear weapons which threatens us. Their very existence warps us as a species. Arundhati Roy writes the following in her book The Algebra of Infinite Justice:

“It is such supreme folly to believe that nuclear weapons are deadly only if they are used. The fact that they exist at all, their very presence in our lives, will wreak more havoc than we can begin to fathom. Nuclear weapons pervade our thinking. Control our behaviour. Administer our societies. Inform our dreams. They bury themselves like meathooks deep in the base of our brains… The nuclear bomb is the most anti-democratic, anti-national, anti-human, outright evil thing that man has ever made. Through it, man now has the power to destroy God’s creation.”

This needs to change. And it won’t be changed by those in power who benefit from the status quo. Humanity itself must awaken from the propaganda cages which have been built around our minds so that the people can use the power of their numbers to force a change. The time to wake up is now.

________________________

The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitterthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Harry Truman and the Atomic Bomb | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on August 12, 2017

https://mises.org/blog/harry-truman-and-atomic-bomb

More that you didn’t learn in government school. Frank Capra’s fake news.

This, however, is absurd. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hiroshima was a city, inhabited by some three hundred thousand people, which contained military elements. In any case, since the harbor was mined and the US Navy and Air Force were in control of the waters around Japan, whatever troops were stationed in Hiroshima had been effectively neutralized.

On other occasions, Truman claimed that Hiroshima was bombed because it was an industrial center. But, as noted in the US Strategic Bombing Survey, “all major factories in Hiroshima were on the periphery of the city — and escaped serious damage.”4 The target was the center of the city. That Truman realized the kind of victims the bombs consumed is evident from his comment to his cabinet on August 10, explaining his reluctance to drop a third bomb: “The thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrible,” he said; he didn’t like the idea of killing “all those kids.”5 Wiping out another one hundred thousand people … all those kids. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »