Floating for Peace on the Golden Rule
By Robert C. Koehler, 20 Sept 23, http://commonwonders.com/floating-for-peace-on-the-golden-rule/—
It’s 10 p.m. at Montrose Harbor in Chicago. Kiko and Tamar help me step from the dock into the wobbly rowboat. Kiko rows us out to the Golden Rule and I climb aboard in wonder. Oh my God! This is it – the 30-foot, anti-nuke sailboat with a history going back almost seven decades . . . back to the era of atmospheric nuclear testing and the Cold War at its simmering height.
The Golden Rule: “Floating for sanity in an insane world.”
Well, somebody’s got to do it! The United Nations has tried. In 2017 it passed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which was finally ratified (by 50 countries) in 2021. Technically, nuclear weapons are now “illegal” – what a joke. The possibility of nuclear war, i.e., Armageddon, is more alive than ever. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock is now set at 90 seconds to midnight.
But the nuclear-armed nations and their allies haven’t given an inch. Their motto remains: Nukes forever (or at least until the end of the world as we know it). This is the case despite an overwhelming global opposition to nukes and “mutually assured destruction.”
Perhaps humanity’s primary – or only – hope is a global reunification from the ground up: the creation of one world, which is not at perpetual war with itself and realizes that power results not from domination but connection: power with others, not over them.
And this, I believe, is where the Golden Rule comes in. Let’s return for a moment to 1958, when hell was still naked and visible: when atmospheric nuclear testing was the order of the day. For the United States, the chosen test site was Bikini Atoll, a coral reef in the Marshall Islands. The inhabitants were relocated and their home destroyed. A total of 67 nuclear tests were conducted, beginning in 1946, with nuclear fallout spreading across the island chain.
A man named Albert Bigelow, unable to shrug off what could be the end of the world, finally felt driven to action, declaring; “How do you reach men when all the horror is in the fact that they feel no horror?” He bought a boat, which was named the Golden Rule, and he and three other Quakers took it upon themselves to sail to the Marhsall Islands and disrupt the testing – you know, with their own lives. As they prepared to do so, they declared their intention to the world.
What happened, however, was that the Golden Rule was stopped by the U.S. Coast Guard before it reached the island chain and the four men were arrested. They were jailed for several months, but the publicity surrounding the event was enormous, igniting outrage. The eventual outcome was the end of atmospheric nuclear testing – step one, you might say, in the process of global nuclear disarmament.
Bigelow eventually sold the Golden Rule and, by 2010, it was just a forgotten fragment of history, sitting derelict in Humboldt Bay, California. One day it sank. Though it was pulled up, the plan was to burn it. This is where Veterans for Peace – aware of the boat’s history – stepped in. The organization purchased and restored the Golden Rule, and it became, once again, a floating force for peace.
The Golden Rule is reborn. And its most recent journey is something called the Great Loop. The boat was transported from Humboldt Bay to Minneapolis, where it set sail down the Mississippi River, captained (for much of the journey) by Kiko Johnston-Kitazawa, a Hawaiian educator, sailor and canoe builder, who responded when Veterans for Peace began seeking a crew and captain.
Kiko described the Great Loop to me thus: “one year, 10,000 miles, a hundred stops.” It went down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, then sailed around the tip of Florida, went over to Cuba to reconnect with that island (ah, site of the infamous “Cuban Missile Crisis” of 1962), then came back to the U.S. coast. Up to New York, into the Hudson River and the Erie Canal, then across Lake Erie, up the Detroit River and around the Great Lakes. Its final stop was Chicago, which was where I met Kiko and connected with the Golden Rule, at a reception hosted by Nuclear Energy Information Service.
This is a peace journey extraordinaire. Kiko was adamant, when he talked to me, that reaching beyond the community of committed peace activists was a crucial part of their mission – connecting with people regardless of their political viewpoints: simply talking about nuclear weapons and the danger humanity is facing: building, you might say, a movement of ordinary people . . . creating a sane future, one human being at a time.
The Veterans for Peace website describes the Golden Rule’s Great Loop journey thus: “We’ve had great reception from local peace activists, politicians, and people of faith. Brass bands, Raging Grannies, musicians and artists have welcomed us in many towns. . . Media coverage has been outstanding, with frequent interviews on local radio, TV and newspapers. Twenty mayors, city councils and state legislatures welcomed the Golden Rule with proclamations supporting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Thousands of volunteers helped with events, hosting and crewing the Golden Rule!”
It was when I was talking to Kiko at the NEIS event that he invited me to see the Golden Rule, which was docked just a few miles away. There’s no way I could turn down this invitation, despite my balance issues and untrustworthy joints. We drove to the harbor, then rowed beneath a shimmering moon out to the boat. I was able to climb aboard. They showed me around. I stood on the historic vessel – this floating future of peace – and took in its cramped quarters with reverence and awe.
We’re all on this journey – to transcend war and nukes, to evolve, to create a world at peace with itself.
Yes, nuclear weapons are immoral. They’re also, practically speaking, useless.
Bulletin, By Ward Hayes Wilson | September 19, 2023
Almost everyone who works actively against nuclear weapons is, at some level, appalled by the immorality of nuclear weapons. This makes sense because the indiscriminate killing of children, grandparents, people with disabilities, and a host of other ordinary folks is appalling.
As a result, the first argument that almost all activists reach for is moral. They bring forward hibakusha to put a human face on the immorality. They talk about the indigenous people who suffered during the mining and production of nuclear weapons. They show graphic pictures of the destruction, the burns, the radiation sickness, and other catastrophic damage done by the bombings. They say, in effect, “Look at the immorality!” They sometimes point to it with a hint of outrage in their voices. How can people not be moved by these horrible, immoral acts?
And yet here we are, 78 years later, in the midst of a second nuclear weapons arms race. Every nation that possesses nuclear weapons is either expanding or upgrading its nuclear arsenal. How can this be?
It seems undeniable, after the better part of a century has passed, that moral arguments are not enough to eliminate nuclear weapons. When a strategy fails for 78 years, it’s probably time for a rethink.
I believe most people—including national leaders—hesitate to eliminate nuclear weapons not because they are heartless, or lack any sense of morality, or are idiots, but because they believe, for some reason, that nuclear weapons are necessary. After all, people often set their moral feelings aside when they believe their survival is at stake.
In the case of nuclear weapons, many people believe that nuclear weapons are such powerful weapons that they can guarantee a country’s safety. Therefore it makes sense that most countries secretly want such powerful weapons, and as a consequence, nuclear weapons will always exist. They are such desirable weapons, in other words, that even if you could ban them, someone would inevitably build an arsenal in secret. So it’s impractical to even think about eliminating them.
If this analysis of how people feel is right, then there are, in fact, two parts to the nuclear weapons elimination equation: morality and necessity. You can only solve the equation if you take on both parts. But you have to solve the parts in the right sequence. Before you can move people with moral discourse, you have to first remove the roadblock in their heads that tells them that their country must have nuclear weapons to keep them safe.
The key to eliminating nuclear weapons, then, is to start with the practical consideration. Make a case that nuclear weapons could reasonably, realistically be eliminated, neutralize that part of the equation, and the morality argument falls like a hammer blow.
“But Ward,” a devil’s advocate might argue, “there are no practical arguments for eliminating nuclear weapons.” Well, actually, there are. A lot of them. Let me point out just three.
First, you may have noticed that when Vladimir Putin threatened to use nuclear weapons again and again in Ukraine last fall, a number of establishment sources suddenly spoke up, making the case that nuclear weapons actually aren’t very good weapons. The New York Times, The Institute for the Study of War, and even Gen. David Petraeus all argued that using nuclear weapons on the battlefield wasn’t very militarily useful.
And if you look back over past wars, military commanders have repeatedly turned away from using nuclear weapons—not because of moral concerns, but because of practical doubts about the military value of the weapons.[1]
It has been an open secret in Washington for decades, apparently, that battlefield use of nuclear weapons was militarily inadvisable……………………..
Finally, many people argue that nuclear weapons are important because of nuclear deterrence. But even a 12-year-old can effectively show that deterrence is fatal over the long run. After all, human beings are fallible, aren’t they? And human beings play a critical role in nuclear deterrence. Human beings make the threats, evaluate the threats, and decide how to respond.
………………………………….if you’re willing to argue against nuclear weapons with a two-step process—first showing that the necessity argument is false and only then arguing that the weapons are horrible and immoral—there’s a clear pathway to elimination. https://thebulletin.org/2023/09/yes-nuclear-weapons-are-immoral-theyre-also-practically-speaking-useless/
Nuclear bomb test veterans relaunch legal action
By Dominic Casciani, 20 Sept 23, BBC News
Veterans of the UK’s nuclear weapons tests are attempting to relaunch a battle for compensation a decade after being legally blocked from suing the government.
Campaigners say newly discovered documents suggest nuclear chiefs may have known the men suffered radioactive damage.
More than 22,000 personnel worked on detonations in Australia and the South Pacific in the 1950s and 1960s.
Campaigners believe personnel suffered cancers and had children with birth defects because of radiation……
In 2012, the Supreme Court narrowly ruled that more than 1,000 veterans could not sue the Ministry of Defence because they had run out of time to bring their case.
But recently found documents suggest the military have long held documents detailing blood and urine tests from personnel.
One of the documents seen by the campaign shows concerns about a pilot’s blood after he had been flying scientific instruments through mushroom clouds.
The men and their families now plan to take the Ministry of Defence to court because they believe there could be thousands more such records.
If the records exist and prove military chiefs suspected radiation damage, that could lead to a last attempt at getting compensation.
‘Guinea Pigs’
Eric Barton, 82, of the “Labrats” campaign group, said British personnel had been treated like guinea pigs.
He suffered cancer and received compensation from the American military because he had witnessed six test denotations of its bombs. But friends who witnessed British bombs have not received any money at all…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66869017
Campaigners win permission to appeal against Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station ruling
Campaigners have won permission for another hearing to
challenge the go ahead to build Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station on the
issue of a permanent water supply and because of public interest in the
development.
Court of Appeal judge Lord Justice Coulson says the Together
Against Sizewell C Limited (TASC) arguments around the need for a
desalination plant on the Suffolk Coast should be looked at again.
He has given TASC permission to appeal against Mr Justice Holgate’s refusal in
the High Court of their judicial review of then Business Secretary Kwasi
Kwarteng’s decision to give development consent to the 3.2 gigawatt power
station. The judge said that, given Mr Kwarteng gave permission for the
power station against the advice of the planning Examining Authority, and
because of TASC’s range of arguments about the need for a water supply,
the appeal had “a real prospect of success”.
Leigh Day 18th Sept 2023
New York Time’s Incredibly Low Bar for Labeling Someone ‘Pro-Putin’
BRYCE GREENE, 20 Sept 23, https://fair.org/home/nyts-incredibly-low-bar-for-labeling-someone-pro-putin/
It doesn’t take much in our media system to be labeled a “Putin apologist” or “pro-Russia.” In this New Cold War, even suggesting that the official enemy is not Hitlerian or completely irrational could earn ridicule and attack.
After the largely stalled Ukrainian counteroffensive against the Russian occupation, conditions on the front have hardened into what many observers describe as a “stalemate.” Like virtually all wars, the Russo-Ukrainian War will end with a negotiated settlement, and the quicker it happens, the quicker the bodies will stop piling up.
Despite this, anyone who advocates actually pursuing negotiations is immediately attacked. The New York Times (8/27/23) did this in an article about former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in an article that argued he “gives a voice to obstinate Russian sympathies.” The Times wrote:
In interviews coinciding with the publication of a memoir, Mr. Sarkozy, who was president from 2007 to 2012, said that reversing Russia’s annexation of Crimea was “illusory,” ruled out Ukraine joining the European Union or NATO because it must remain “neutral,” and insisted that Russia and France “need each other.”
“People tell me Vladimir Putin isn’t the same man that I met. I don’t find that convincing. I’ve had tens of conversations with him. He is not irrational,” he told Le Figaro. “European interests aren’t aligned with American interests this time,” he added.
To Times writer Roger Cohen, Sarkozy’s remarks “underscored the strength of the lingering pockets of pro-Putin sympathy that persist in Europe,” which persist despite Europe’s “unified stand against Russia.” Cohen didn’t challenge or rebut anything the former president said—he merely quoted the words, labeled them “pro-Putin,” and moved on.
The New Cold War mentality has encouraged a new wave of McCarthyite attacks against anyone who dissents against the establishment status quo. Merely pointing out that Putin is “not irrational” flies in the face of the accepted conventional wisdom that Putin is a Hitler-like madman hell bent on conquering Eastern Europe. That conventional wisdom is what allows calls for negotiation to be dismissed without any serious discussion, and challenging that wisdom elicits harsh reactions from establishment voices.
Fukushima: China’s seafood imports from Japan down 67% in August
China’s imports of seafood from Japan slumped last month as Tokyo started
to release treated waste water from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power
plant. Imports of Japanese seafood fell 67.6% in August from the same month
last year, China’s customs authority said.
Japan’s ministry of agriculture
and fisheries says China was the world’s top importer of the country’s
seafood. Last year, Asia’s largest economy imported 84.4 billion yen
($571m; £461m) of seafood from its neighbour. The sharp fall came as Japan
prepared to start releasing the waste water and in the aftermath of the
release.
BBC 20th Sept 2023
Time to arrest deployment of nuclear weapons in Constable’s County, Nuclear Free Local Authorities tell Ministers
Time to Arrest deployment of nuclear weapons in Constable’s County, NFLA
tell Ministers. In advance of a National Day of Action (23 September)
called by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament to protest against the
return of US nuclear weapons to Britain, the Chair of the Nuclear Free
Local Authorities has written to the Foreign and Defence Secretaries
calling on them to refuse the United States authorities permission to base
B61-12 guided nuclear bombs at RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk.
NFLA 19th Sept 2023
Cooling system at Zaporizhzhya stabilised – but military action in the area continues
In its Update 183 on the Ukraine situation International Atomic
Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi announced that Zaporizhzhya
Nuclear Power Plant has been drilling more wells at the site as part of
efforts to find new sources of cooling water following the destruction of
the downstream Kakhovka dam more than three months ago.
ZNPP has built
another two groundwater wells to supply the sprinkler ponds that cool the
six reactors and spent fuel, bringing the total of new wells to nine.
Together they pump around 200 cubic metres of water per hour into the
sprinkler ponds, representing most of the cooling needs of the six shutdown
reactors.
The remainder of the water comes from the drainage system and
clean water that is periodically discharged from the plant’s chemical
water treatment facility. The IAEA has been informed that the water supply
situation will be assessed after a tenth well has been constructed to see
if more will be needed.
South Asian leader slams AUKUS pact
“It is a military alliance moved against one country – China.”
The US-led initiative was created to antagonize Beijing, Sri Lanka’s president has said.
https://www.rt.com/news/583182-sri-lanka-slam-aukus-pact/ 20 Sept 23
Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe has condemned the AUKUS pact as an alliance designed to target China, calling it a “strategic misstep,” and insisting it will only divide Asia into rival camps and destabilize the region.
Speaking on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on Monday, Wickremesing he took aim at AUKUS, which was formed by the US, UK, and Australia in 2021. “I don’t think it was needed,” he said.
“I think it’s a strategic misstep. I think they made a mistake,” the president stated. “It is a military alliance moved against one country – China.”
Wickremesinghe went on to say that Sri Lanka wants no part in the growing tensions between Washington and Beijing, adding that his country would like to maintain good relations with both powers and does not wish to see Asia divided into competing blocs.
“The next round of rivalry is going on. And that’s taking place in Asia. It’s the question of China versus the US, on how they are going to divide their region of influence in Asia,” he said. “Why are we getting pulled into it? It’s difficult for us to understand.”
The president also expressed concern about the stepped-up US military presence in the region in recent years – often labeled ‘freedom of navigation’ missions by American officials. “As far as the Indian Ocean is concerned, we don’t want any military activity,” he continued, saying most neighboring countries “will not want NATO anywhere close by.”
AUKUS was established in 2021 between Washington, Canberra, and London in part to facilitate the transfer of military technology among the three allies. Though officials from each country have maintained that the bloc is not a formal military alliance and is solely focused on technology sharing, Beijing has condemned the project, claiming it will only help to spread nuclear weapons around the globe and kick off an arms race in Asia.
“The three countries have gone further down the wrong and dangerous path for their own geopolitical self-interest, completely ignoring the concerns of the international community,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said earlier this year, adding that the AUKUS pact is based on a “Cold War mentality which will only motivate an arms race, damage the international nuclear nonproliferation regime, and harm regional stability and peace.”
Tensions between Washington and Beijing have steadily escalated in recent years, with former US President Donald Trump kicking off a low-level trade war with China which persists under his successor, Joe Biden.
The Biden administration has also deployed navy warships to waters near China on a near-monthly basis, including the disputed Taiwan Strait, drawing repeated condemnation from Chinese officials
The Ukrainian Morale in the Battlefield: A Snapshot
Pepe Escobar. September 19, 2023 https://strategic-culture.su/news/2023/09/19/the-ukrainian-morale-in-the-battlefield-a-snapshot/
It’s now firmly established that the Ukrainian counter-offensive turned out to be the feeder of a bloody meat grinder of astonishing proportions
Of every 100 people who joined Ukrainian units last Fall, months before the counter-offensive, only 10 to 20 remain. The rest are dead, wounded or incapacitated. These stats were confirmed by the online publication Poltavashchyna.
It’s quite enlightening to check the following snapshot of the Ukrainian frontlines only five months ago, in Spring, slightly before the start of the counter-offensive. The data was leaked by Ukrainians. The authenticity of the documents has been fully confirmed.
This is a report prepared by the temporary acting commander of the 2nd mechanized battalion of military unit A4007, Captain Dmytro Bilyi. He is reporting directly to the commander of the military unit.
Bilyi says that between April 19 and 20, 2023, he as temporary acting commander as well as other officers have concluded that the 2nd battalion had reached critically low morale and psychological conditions.
The battalion had also suffered numerous sanitary and irretrievable losses. Most soldiers refused to perform combat missions. The level of morale in different companies was evaluated as ranging between 20% and 42%.
( Report supplied on the original – in Ukrainian)
This is a list of soldiers from military unit A7097 who have voluntarily left a position called “Sadik”. Translation: the Ukrainians lost control over this strong point, Sadik, because of these guys. Among them there is a Captain, Mykhailo Shabunin.
(List supplied on original)
This is another report about a group of soldiers who have “voluntarily” abandoned the battlefield. (List supplied on original)
This is an urgent report on the critically low level of combat readiness of the 5th company of the 2nd battalion. The staffing of the company fell to 60% – and the unit needs to be withdrawn from the frontline. ( List supplied on original)
This is the personal data of 10 servicemen that left. So relatives and friends can actually get some info about soldiers. (provided on original)
This is an urgent report by Major Dmytro Hnatyuk, commander of the 2nd batallion on massive “voluntary” withdrawing of firing positions Yaremche, Dakh, Derevo, Polohy, Halych.
Hnatyuk managed to get some 10 soldiers to return to their positions. The rest didn’t.
What next?
The documents above paint a clear picture of what was going on in the frontlines back in April. The situation now may be even more dire. The Ukrainians already started their counteroffensive with very low morale. No wonder the actual results were catastrophic.
And yet none of that should elicit complacency. There’s a feeling that as it stands all’s quiet in the Donbass front. Not really. Ukrainians continue to assault Russian positions with maniacal persistence. After all they dispose of infinite numbers of infantry – faithful to Kiev’s “logic” of war to the last Ukrainian.
The Kiev machine is now being retooled, and new units are being prepared. Russians did destroy an astonishing number of Western weaponry, but Kiev’s forces are not depleted – yet.
There was quite a lot of expectation that after the failed counter-offensive Kiev would negotiate. That won’t happen. The Hegemon won’t allow it. So the “counter-offensive”, 2.0 or whatever, will continue. Kiev’s forces are getting ready for renewed action before the Summer of 2024. So Russia better get its own devastating offensive rolling – sooner rather than later.
Never forget: the Hegemon’s Plan A is yet another Forever War. There’s no Plan B.
War Profiteers Are A Sign Of A Profoundly Sick Society
Lockheed CEO James Taiclet called the most recent hike in the US military budget “as good an outcome as our industry or our company could ask for
There are vast fortunes riding on governments equipping themselves to kill large numbers of human beings.
CAITLIN JOHNSTONE, SEP 20, 2023
“War is good for business.”
So reads a quote from an arms industry executive in a recent Reuters article titled “At London arms fair, global war fears are good for business” about Europe’s biggest arms show, the biennial Defence and Security Equipment International. You will probably be unsurprised to learn that Reuters does not name the war profiteer whose quote inspired their headline.
War is good for business, and it’s expected to get even better. The world’s largest military contractor Lockheed Martin saw its stock rise by a whopping 37 percent last year — helped along by taxpayer-sponsored stock buybacks — and in a report titled “Lockheed Martin: Huge Growth Ahead”, an investment analyst for AlmaStreet Capital predicted last month that Lockheed’s massive profits will only continue to climb. Calling the escalated geopolitical tensions in the current political atmosphere “the most favorable condition that Lockheed Martin could possibly operate under,” the article’s author writes the following:
“Governments worldwide are increasing their budget for defense and security under this heightened geopolitical tensions worldwide. The US government is not an exception. As the largest contractor to the US government, Lockheed Martin is bound to be the biggest beneficiary of the increased defense budget. Given that the company already reached approximately 8% of YoY net sales growth in 2Q23, I believe escalating geopolitical tensions along with easing macroeconomic conditions would allow Lockheed Martin to soon achieve double-digit growth in net sales by the end of the year.”
So it’s no wonder that Lockheed CEO James Taiclet called the most recent hike in the US military budget “as good an outcome as our industry or our company could ask for.” There are vast fortunes riding on governments equipping themselves to kill large numbers of human beings.
There’s a popular quote, “It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society,” commonly attributed to Jiddu Krishnamurti but most likely coined by Kurt Vonnegut’s son Mark. Whenever I read reports like this about corporations raking in billions from death, suffering, and extremely dangerous acts of brinkmanship between military powers, I always find that phrase “a profoundly sick society” rattling around in my head.
It’s hard to imagine a society sicker than one in which corporations are not only allowed to profit from war and militarism, but to actually push for more of it using campaign donations, lobbying, and the funding of influential warmongering think tanks. It’s no less evil than if corporations were allowed to slaughter foreigners like livestock and sell their body parts for profit at industrial scale; the only thing that’s different is the payment plan. And yet the people who do this are celebrated as respected job creators instead of thrown into cages like the monsters they are.
This is not the sort of civilization we should strive to be well-adjusted to. It is no sign of health to be well-adjusted to a society in which someone can become a billionaire selling weapons of mass murder after lobbying the government to perpetrate those murders. It is no sign of health to be well-adjusted to a society in which the military industrial complex launders information through the media to promote its deadly products and agendas. It is no sign of health to be well-adjusted to a society in which war profiteering corporations can reap massive quarterly profits in a proxy war that was provoked by the west while pouring fortunes into think tanks which helped manufacture consent for those provocations and which spin the west’s actions in a positive light for the media.
If this society could give rise to something so depraved as the military industrial complex, then it is not the sort of society we should seek to blend in with. This is the sort of society we should want to stick out like a sore thumb in. The sort of society in which we should be swimming against the current when everyone else is swimming with it. The sort of society in which we say a resounding NO to things that everyone else is saying yes to.
This society has failed as spectacularly as anything can possibly fail. We live in a mind-controlled dystopia where war profiteers get to steer public policy, where the entire biosphere is being fed into the wood chipper of global capitalism while we rapidly accelerate toward nuclear armageddon. This is the most insane civilization anyone could possibly design. We should seek dissent and divergence from it to the fullest extent possible.
Saudi Arabia Says It Will Get Nuclear Weapon If…
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman denied in an interview with Fox News that the Saudis have suspended US-brokered talks with Israel.
World NewsAgence France-Presse September 21, 2023
Israel’s is the region’s only nuclear weapons state, if an undeclared one.
Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader said Wednesday that a historic normalization of relations with Israel is getting “closer,” as he also warned that the kingdom will seek a nuclear weapon if foe Iran gets one first. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman denied in an interview with Fox News that the Saudis have suspended US-brokered talks with Israel.
“Every day we get closer,” the prince, who is widely seen as effectively the kingdom’s leader, said……………………..
In the interview, the crown prince, most commonly known by his initials MBS, renewed warnings that Saudi Arabia would seek nuclear weapons if Iran does.
“If they get one, we have to get one,” he said.
Saudi Arabia has been seeking security guarantees, including reportedly a treaty, with the United States in return for normalizing with Israel.
Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon but has breached agreed limits on uranium enrichment since former president Donald Trump left a 2015 international agreement to put curbs on Tehran’s nuclear program in return for lifting sanctions.
Israel’s is the region’s only nuclear weapons state, if an undeclared one.
President Joe Biden discussed Saudi Arabia during a meeting with Netanyahu on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.
The Biden administration’s diplomatic plans in the Middle East have been rocked by tense relations with Netanyahu, who is accused at home by opponents of undermining Israeli democracy through far-reaching reforms of the judiciary……………
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/saudi-arabia-says-it-will-get-nuclear-weapon-if-iran-does-first-4409031
The President’s Power To Launch Nuclear Weapons Highlights A Troubling Paradox In U.S. Strategy
The paradox is that although the NC3 system provides checks on the authority to use weapons at every level below the president, the president himself (or herself) has sole authority to order the launch of nuclear weapons. There are no limits on that authority, no official with the power to countermand a launch order from the chief executive.
Loren Thompson, Forbes, 30 Sept 23
The U.S. government is engaged in a comprehensive modernization of its nuclear arsenal that will replace all three types of weapon systems comprising the strategic deterrent and upgrade the command network that controls them.
The nuclear command, control and communications system, often referred to simply as NC3 in military circles, is the least visible part of the strategic posture, but also the most complex. It consists of over 200 separate programs, some of which also provide command of non-nuclear forces.
Command and control of the nuclear force is vital to the deterrence of war. As Bruce Blair, a seminal thinker on the subject, observed in a 1985 book, “If command and control fail, nothing else matters.”
A single warhead of the kind commonly found in the Russian strategic arsenal can devastate 36 square miles of an urban area such as New York, and the Russians have at least 1,550 such warheads capable of reaching targets in the U.S.
China, after many years of restraint, is now expanding its own strategic arsenal.
The U.S. government long ago abandoned efforts to blunt a major nuclear attack against its homeland. The destructive power of the Russian and Chinese arsenals seemed too fearsome to counter, and leaders worried that trying to do so would provoke an arms race.
So, U.S. survival depends instead on the threat of retaliation. The fundamental precept of deterrence strategy is that an aggressor will not attack if it knows it will suffer intolerable damage in response. That’s the phrase planners often use—”intolerable damage.”
But it isn’t enough to possess weapons capable of visiting such destruction on an adversary. There needs to be an NC3 system that can detect attacks quickly, determine their source, and deliver a nuclear response proportional to the provocation.
Speed and proportionality are critical for the threat of retaliation to be credible. If the U.S. fails to react quickly, much of its arsenal might be destroyed on the ground. If it fails to respond in a measured way, it could cause a limited attack to escalate to all-out war.
The overarching goal of U.S. nuclear strategy is to prevent nuclear war from occurring by depriving enemies of any rational reason for beginning one. The nuclear force must be able to survive and operate even in the midst of cataclysmic conflict.
At the same time, adversaries and allies must be sure that there is no chance of what Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley in a 2021 memo described as “an illegal, unauthorized or accidental launch.”
Thus, the nation’s nuclear posture must be super stable, and yet able to respond deliberately and decisively in a surprise attack.
This has led to an underlying paradox in that posture as planners struggle to reconcile the need for control of weapons with the need to act fast in an emergency.
The paradox is that although the NC3 system provides checks on the authority to use weapons at every level below the president, the president himself (or herself) has sole authority to order the launch of nuclear weapons. There are no limits on that authority, no official with the power to countermand a launch order from the chief executive.
Conversely, if the president elects not to launch weapons, even in an extreme crisis, no official has the power to compel him. The president’s control of the nuclear arsenal is absolute, at least until his demise in said crisis is confirmed.
Demise in such a scenario would be highly likely. The only plausible circumstances in which a rational adversary would launch a nuclear attack is the belief that it can degrade U.S. retaliatory forces in a surprise attack.
The adversary would probably begin by destroying the nation’s capital in what is sometimes called a decapitating attack on the government, and then quickly shift to targeting U.S. nuclear forces before the chain of command can regroup.
U.S. Strategic Command trains continuously to preclude such an attack from succeeding, but there’s no way of knowing how a nuclear adversary might act in a crisis, or how they might assess their options…………………………………
In a command and control system where tens of billions of dollars have been spent to assure affirmative control of weapons of mass destruction, at the very apex of the system the ultimate decider has no constraints on his or her authority to launch.
This unfettered power exists even in the absence of any apparent emergency. If President Biden directed a nuclear launch today, the only way that could be stopped would be for subordinates to violate their oaths to follow orders. Even if the president appeared to be suffering from diminished cognitive capacity, or an emotional breakdown.
………….fears of existential conflict have made the presidency “something akin to a nuclear monarchy.”
Does the president’s power make deterrence more credible? In some circumstances it probably does. In other circumstances, it might make nuclear conflict more likely—for example, if the attacker thinks the president will be too disoriented to respond quickly, or is threatening to launch in the absence of a real provocation. https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2023/09/19/the-presidents-power-to-launch-nuclear-weapons-highlights-a-troubling-paradox-in-us-strategy/?sh=7d87205c13cf
Pope says world on brink of nuclear war like 1962 Cuban missile crisis
‘A world free of nuclear arms is possible and necessary,’ pontiff says
Beyza Binnur Donmez |20.09.2023 https://www.aa.com.tr/en/politics/pope-says-world-on-brink-of-nuclear-war-like-1962-cuban-missile-crisis/2996411
GENEVA
Pope Francis warned Tuesday that the world is on the brink of a nuclear war like the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.
Francis conveyed the message at an international conference in Oslo commemorating the 60th anniversary of Pope John XXIII’s influential encyclical Pacem in Terris.
In his message, according to Vatican News, he said the conference is taking place “as our world continues to be in the grip of a third world war fought piecemeal, and, in the tragic case of the conflict in Ukraine, not without the threat of recourse to nuclear weapons.”
He drew a comparison between the present moment and the time that preceded the publication of Pacem in Terris, where the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962 brought the world perilously close to nuclear destruction.
Urging the conference to focus on the sections of Pacem in Terris that address disarmament and the ways to achieve long-lasting peace, the pontiff said that “a world free of nuclear arms is possible and necessary.”
He also recalled his statement from the Hiroshima Peace Memorial in 2019, when he said that “the use of atomic energy for purposes of war is immoral, just as the possessing of nuclear weapons is immoral.”
Regarding conventional arms, he said that they “should be used for defensive purposes only and not directed to civilian targets.”
Biden’s Whoppers at UN on Ukraine Burger King worthy.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 20 Sept 23
Outside of NATO and a few other countries, most of the world’s attendees at President Biden’s UN speech grew hungrier as he dished up US Whoppers about Russia over Ukraine.
He began by blasting Russia for abandoning longstanding nuclear arms control agreements, citing Russia’s suspension of New Start, the last of 4 such US Russian agreements. He omitted that it was the US that abandoned the other 3 first: Anti-Ballistic Missiles System Treaty in 2002; Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019; Open Skies in 2020. Biden’s is simply “having it his way.”
On Ukraine more Whoppers. “Russia alone bears responsibility for this war. Russia alone has the power to end this war immediately. And it is Russia alone that stands in the way of peace.” But even NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has acknowledged that Putin invaded to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO after the US and the alliance refused to provide a guarantee that Kyiv would never become a member. On Ukraine provocation, Joe’s dining at Burger King; Jens at McDonalds.
Regarding Russia having sole responsibility to end it, Biden somehow omitted the US sabotaged every effort by not only Russia, but Ukraine itself, to negotiate the war’s end early on and along the way these past 19 months.
Instead of serving up Whoppers on Ukraine ‘his way,’ Biden should understand we peace loving folks around the world ‘deserve a break today’ from US perpetual war, direct and proxy, getting millions killed injured and displaced, with nuclear confrontation more likely every day.
Biden’s perpetual war policies are a tough Whopper to swallow.
1 This Month
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (74)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
