Nuclear weapons present the greatest public health and existential threat to our survival every moment of every day. Yet the United States and world nuclear nations stand in breach of the 1968 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty which commits these nations to work in good faith to end the arms race and to achieve nuclear disarmament.
Meanwhile, the USA is going to invest a trillion dollars over the next couple of decades updating the nuclear triad and developing a whole new type of weapon, the mini-nuke. How do they intend to use that, if they haven't done so already?
Hillary is making it a cornerstone of her campaign to poke at the Russians. The neocons, of course, are all for it. World War III will be SO profitable and painless too as they and the wealthy build multi-million dollar bunkers under their mansions with years of stored food, and even bowling alleys. It will be the great culling of the human race. Oh, well. We're just a bunch of useless eaters in the grand scheme.
I feel that the only way to ban nukes and other weapons is to end extreme wealth inequality to control our greed and lust for money and power.
Yes Nuclear weapons need to be abolished. The problem is that as long as the United States of America exists in its current form , they will not be.
All that is preventing the US with NATO as allies from making war on Russia and China , which would lead to the deaths of millions, is the threat of those two Countries responding with Nuclear weapons.
When I was 7, I carried a sign in a march to end nuclear weapons. That was in 1958. My opposition to these weapons hasn't changed in a half century.
But I've come to realize that banning nuclear weapons isn't good enough -- something Albert Einstein realized even then. The existence of nuclear weapons is a symptom of a deeper problem, namely the absence of sufficient planet-wide laws to resolve disputes between nations in a just and impartial way, and a mechanism to enforce the resolutions.
We need to create a world where war between any two nations is as unthinkable as a war today between France and Germany. World peace is what we need, and it's only by developing international institutions with enough authority and impartiality that we can make it happen.
A good place to start is a belief that it is possible. Then elect leaders who share that vision.
"Nuclear Weapons – The Time for Abolition is Now" sure sounds a nice sentiment and impossible to disagree with, but however necessary to the survival of our species, anyone who thinks that abolition might be accomplished within existing political process, democratic or otherwise can't see the forest through the trees. Yet all might not be quite lost!
"For individuals prepared to think for themselves, with the intellectual integrity to shake off their existing prejudices, who will explore outside the cultural box of history and able to stand against the tides of tribal, peer, group think, and all fashionable thought and spin, with the humility to accept correction and the moral courage to learn something new, who will TEST, discover and confirm this new insight for themselves, an intellectual, spiritual and moral revolution is under way; where the once impossible becomes inevitable, by the most potent, political, progressive, Non Violent Direct Action never imagined. One able to advance peace, justice, change and progress and which the modern corporate/national security state can neither stop nor interfere with." More at http://www.energon.org.uk
Doesn't seem to be stopping the U.S. at the moment even with the threat of nuclear retaliation, considering how much the U.S. is poking the Russian bear, with Hillary all but admitting that she plans to give the bear a big ol push.
Wouldn't it be great if instead of spending that trillion dollars on more nuclear weapons, Americans could have single-payer health insurance like you Canucks?
Sounds like he is optimistic which unfortunately tends to not be the same as realistic these days. Still though, the country wide nuclear drill and his insistence that Russians living aborad should return home shows that he is at least a little concerned.
Good point. The US, more than any government, is responsible for the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the world's failure to abolish them. In the 50s when there were actual disarmament efforts underway, US leaders' obsession with hegemony prevented them from agreeing to any accord to disarm. One might have justified that stance by arguing, as conventional "wisdom" had it, that the US needed them to prevent a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. But 26 years after the end of the USSR, there is surely no such plausible justification. Nor is there any justification for the continued existence of NATO. NATO has been suborned into the US and the US-NATO has become a Global Predator, the greatest threat to world peace the world has ever known, and one that now threatens nuclear annihilation.