Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/06/hiroshima-and-new-arms-race-no-winners
"There can be no winner." That’s all that needs to be said. Nothing can change that.
Monies spent on annihilation is wasted money.
Neither political party agrees with this.
To this day, polling by Microsoft News / Civic Science finds that the majority of the US population still support the slaughter of a quarter of a million Japanese civilians by dropping nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
What’s worse is that a poll by YouGov and the bulletin of the Atomic Scientist found that a third of US citizens would support a nuclear attack on North Korea that would slaughter a million North Korean citizens:
What does the polling for the WWII bombings tell you? It tells me that propaganda is a very powerful tool, and is the reason enlightened positions are scrubbed from our history books. The majority of people still believe it was the right thing to do, because they have never been given the truth, and to this day believe it saved thousands of Americans lives, the official story.
I might be wrong about the North Korea issue, but Trump supporters make up aprox. 25-30% of voters, pretty darn close to 1/3 of Americans who support bombing NK. As you and I can probably agree, these people are just certifiably nuts. No argument, no matter how articulate, moves these people from their positions on issues, it’s like they were born without the ability to apply reason to any given subject matter.
Still scary to be sure.
Robert Dodge is correct: time is running out. Unfortunately the momentum towards war seems to be building faster than the momentum towards peace. This may be because of everyone’s fixation with the Cold War. Proponents of deterrence claim that strategy saved us from nuclear Armageddon then – and will again. Peace campaigners claim public protests worked, leading to the capitulation of the superpowers and the INF Treaty – and will again. Deterrence doctrine can only work if it can prevent the scenarios where Mutual Assured Destruction might have to be resorted to. Today, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do that. We will soon face the scenario where (unlike the Cuban missile crisis or Euro missile crisis) one protagonist will not be able to step back from the brink, blindly stumbling into a situation they cannot de-escalate. All that is left is Deterrence’s fall-back position – annihilation. Nuclear war did not happen during the Cold War because the Cold War was the peace, a post-world war environment; we are now in a pre-world war environment. Both sides need to see this. At present it looks neither side can prevent it.