Global Ethics


トランプの指を発射ボタンに触らせるな:核ミサイルを一触即発の警戒態勢から外せ by limitlesslife

核情報
http://kakujoho.net/
の田窪です。

トランプの指を発射ボタンに触らせるな:核ミサイルを一触即発の警戒態勢から外せ

米国の反核NGOプラウシェアーズ財団が、トランプ大統領が登場する前に核ミサイルの一触即発のミサイル発射態勢を解除するようオバマ大統領に要請するキャンぺーンを展開しています。米国の反核運動の危機感を示すものです。ウイリアム・ペリー元国防長官も、この昨年末に始められたこの要請文署名キャンペーンに協力するようツイッターで呼びかけています。署名数は、1月13日段階で約10万3000筆となっています。

詳しくは核情報をご覧下さい。

MLホームページ: http://www.freeml.com/abolition-japan



ノーム・チョムスキー:ドナルド・トランプの核拡大ツイートは「私が見た最も恐怖を感じさせるものの一つだ。」 by limitlesslife

<a href=”https://limitlesslife.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/023726-chomsky-122316.jpg”><img src=”https://limitlesslife.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/023726-chomsky-122316.jpg?w=300&#8243; alt=”023726-chomsky-122316″ width=”300″ height=”136″ class=”alignnone size-medium wp-image-17838″ /></a>

Noam Chomsky. (photo: Sascha Schuermann/Getty) go to original article

ノーム・チョムスキー:ドナルド・トランプの核拡大ツイートは「私が見た最も恐怖を感じさせるものの一つだ。」

<strong>合衆国とロシアはすでに世界の核弾頭の93%を持っている</strong>

世界で最も有名な学者達の一人がドナルド・トランプの合衆国の核能力の「強化と拡大」についてのツイートは「恐怖を感じさせる」と言った。

マサチューセッツ工科大学のノーム・チョムスキー名誉教授は、ドナルド・トランプの核拡大ツイートは「最近私が見た最も恐怖を感じさせるものの一つだ」と言った。

「プーチンは十分悪い、が少なくとも防衛的な役割だ。それは(米攻撃の為の)メキシコの国境では無く、ロシアの国境の話だ」とチョムスキー氏はハッフィンポスト紙に語った。

フランス通信社によれば「我々は戦略的核軍事力、特に現存と予測されるミサイル防衛システムを突破できると信頼できるミサイル複合の軍事能力を強化する必要がある」とプーチンは語った。

「我々は世界における、特にロシア国境での、力の均衡と政治・軍事状況の如何なる変化も注意深く監視して我が国への脅威を中和する(均衡回復する)計画を迅速に適応させなければならない。」

チョムスキー氏は世界の指導者達の言明は、我々自身の技術で人類を破滅するのにどれだけ近いかを示す、国際的に認められた象徴である核科学者紀要の「世界破滅時計」は、2017年に更新されることになっているが、変えられる可能性があると言った。彼は真夜中まで三分は「更に真夜中に近くなる」かも知れないと言った。

同教授は次期大統領とそのナチ・ドイツ的選挙公約や修辞をする選挙運動を声に出して批判してきた。

しかし、本問題に関する次期大統領の疑問を持たせる言明の経緯からして、核兵器に対するトランプ氏の見解に反対する声はチョムスキー氏に止まらない。

トランプ氏は以前に、韓国と日本は自分達の核兵器を手に入れるべきだと示唆しており、自分の外交アドバイザーに、核を使わないなら何故合衆国はそれを持っているのかと尋ねたとさえ言われている。トランプ氏はその質問はしていないと否定しているが。

合衆国は約4千6百発の核弾頭を所有しており、ロシアと合わせると、世界中の核兵器の圧倒的多数を所有している。

トランプ氏のツイートは、140字にとどまるので、自分の熱発生(煽る)言辞の好み以外に国家安全専門家やアドバイザーに何らかの確認(安心)を与えるものではない。

大統領候補のジェブ・ブッシュとミット・ロムニーに助言をしていた共和党の国家安全専門家であるジョン・ヌーナンはツイッターで次のように書いている:「しかし、我々が攻撃されたかどうかも知らず、b・cの外国の指導者達がツイッターで意地悪い事を言ったのかも知れないのに、(核弾頭)発射の鍵を渡さなければならないと想像もして見なさい。」

トランプ氏は自分が気を確かに持っているとか、向かって来る核の脅威に関して即座の判断をする平静さをもっているという(安心の)確証を彼の批判者達に与えることは殆ど何もしていない。

もしロシアからミサイルが発射されたら、ホワイトハウスを爆撃するのに30分であり、大西洋からだとたったの12分である。
ーーーーーーーーーーー

(Original article)

Noam Chomsky: Donald Trump’s Nuclear Expansion Tweet Was “One of the Most Frightening Things I’ve Seen”

By Rachael Revesz, The Independent
24 December 16

The US and Russia already own more than 93 per cent of nuclear warheads in the world
One of the world’s most famous scholars said he was “frightened” by Donald Trump’s tweet on “strengthening and expanding” nuclear capabilities in the US.

Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said Mr Trump’s tweet was “one of the most frightening things I’ve seen recently”.

“Putin’s is bad enough,” Mr Chomsky told the Huffington Post, “but at least it has a defensive cast. It’s about Russia’s borders, not Mexico’s.”

Russian president Vladimir Putin also said he wanted to build his nuclear capabilities.

“We need to strengthen the military potential of strategic nuclear forces, especially with missile complexes that can reliably penetrate any existing and prospective missile defense systems,” Mr Putin said, according to Agence France-Presse.

“We must carefully monitor any changes in the balance of power and in the political-military situation in the world, especially along Russian borders, and quickly adapt plans for neutralizing threats to our country.”

Mr Chomsky said the statements from the world leaders could bring about a change to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock, which is an internationally recognised symbol of how close we are to destroying humanity with our own technology – and is due to be updated in 2017. He said the clock might move from three minutes to midnight to “even closer to midnight”.

The professor has been a vocal critic of the president-elect, comparing his campaign pledges and rhetoric to Nazi Germany.

But Mr Chomsky was not the only opposing voice on Mr Trump’s views on nuclear weapons, given the president-elect’s history of dubious statements on the subject.

Mr Trump has previously suggested that South Korea and Japan should obtain their own nuclear weapons, and he has even reportedly asked a foreign policy adviser why the US has nuclear weapons if it does not use them. Mr Trump denied asking the question.

The US owns around 4,600 nuclear warheads and, along with Russia, owns the vast majority of nuclear weapons in the world.

Mr Trump’s tweet, limited to 140 characters, did not give national security experts and advisers much reassurance for anything other than his preference for heated rhetoric.

John Noonan, a Republican national security expert who advised presidential candidates Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, wrote on twitter: “But imagine having to turn launch keys not knowing if we were under attack or it if was b/c foreign leaders said a mean thing on twitter.”

Mr Trump has done little to assure his critics that he has the presence of mind and the steadiness to make a quick decision regarding an imminent nuclear threat.

If a missile was launched from Russia, it would take 30 minutes to hit the White House – and just 12 minutes from the Atlantic Ocean.

_______________

(Japanese translation of the above)

ノーム・チョムスキー:ドナルド・トランプの核拡大ツイートは「私が見た最も恐怖を感じさせるものの一つだ。」

<strong>合衆国とロシアはすでに世界の核弾頭の93%を持っている</strong>

世界で最も有名な学者達の一人がドナルド・トランプの合衆国の核能力の「強化と拡大」についてのツイートは「恐怖を感じさせる」と言った。

マサチューセッツ工科大学のノーム・チョムスキー名誉教授は、ドナルド・トランプの核拡大ツイートは「最近私が見た最も恐怖を感じさせるものの一つだ」と言った。

「プーチンは十分悪い、が少なくとも防衛的な役割だ。それは(米攻撃の為の)メキシコの国境では無く、ロシアの国境の話だ」とチョムスキー氏はハッフィンポスト紙に語った。

フランス通信社によれば「我々は戦略的核軍事力、特に現存と予測されるミサイル防衛システムを突破できると信頼できるミサイル複合の軍事能力を強化する必要がある」とプーチンは語った。

「我々は世界における、特にロシア国境での、力の均衡と政治・軍事状況の如何なる変化も注意深く監視して我が国への脅威を中和する(均衡回復する)計画を迅速に適応させなければならない。」

チョムスキー氏は世界の指導者達の言明は、我々自身の技術で人類を破滅するのにどれだけ近いかを示す、国際的に認められた象徴である核科学者紀要の「世界破滅時計」は、2017年に更新されることになっているが、変えられる可能性があると言った。彼は真夜中まで三分は「更に真夜中に近くなる」かも知れないと言った。

同教授は次期大統領とそのナチ・ドイツ的選挙公約や修辞をする選挙運動を声に出して批判してきた。

しかし、本問題に関する次期大統領の疑問を持たせる言明の経緯からして、核兵器に対するトランプ氏の見解に反対する声はチョムスキー氏に止まらない。

トランプ氏は以前に、韓国と日本は自分達の核兵器を手に入れるべきだと示唆しており、自分の外交アドバイザーに、核を使わないなら何故合衆国はそれを持っているのかと尋ねたとさえ言われている。トランプ氏はその質問はしていないと否定しているが。

合衆国は約4千6百発の核弾頭を所有しており、ロシアと合わせると、世界中の核兵器の圧倒的多数を所有している。

トランプ氏のツイートは、140字にとどまるので、自分の熱発生(煽る)言辞の好み以外に国家安全専門家やアドバイザーに何らかの確認(安心)を与えるものではない。

大統領候補のジェブ・ブッシュとミット・ロムニーに助言をしていた共和党の国家安全専門家であるジョン・ヌーナンはツイッターで次のように書いている:「しかし、我々が攻撃されたかどうかも知らず、b・cの外国の指導者達がツイッターで意地悪い事を言ったのかも知れないのに、(核弾頭)発射の鍵を渡さなければならないと想像もして見なさい。」

トランプ氏は自分が気を確かに持っているとか、向かって来る核の脅威に関して即座の判断をする平静さをもっているという(安心の)確証を彼の批判者達に与えることは殆ど何もしていない。

もしロシアからミサイルが発射されたら、ホワイトハウスを爆撃するのに30分であり、大西洋からだとたったの12分である。



ダニエル・エルズバーグインタビュー「現在はキューバ危機以来の核戦争の危機」 by limitlesslife
December 3, 2016, 8:11 am
Filed under: 核(武装、戦争、破局、・・・)

    Peace Philosophy Centre


ダニエル・エルズバーグインタビュー「現在はキューバ危機以来の核戦争の危機」 Daniel Ellsberg Interview in Shukan Kinyobi (Nov. 25)

Posted: 02 Dec 2016 01:38 PM PST

Daniel Ellsberg
Photo: Rick Carter 

『週刊金曜日』11月25日号から、当ブログ運営人・乗松聡子によるインタビュー記事を紹介する。

10月末、カリフォルニア州サンタ・バーバラで Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (核時代平和財団)によるシンポジウム「Fierce Urgency to Nuclear Zero」(切羽詰まった核兵器ゼロへの道)が開かれ、そこで元国防総省・国務省職員ダニエル・エルズバーグ氏にインタビューする機会を得た。

エルズバーグ氏は1971年、ランド研究所在籍中にベトナム戦争についての政府内部文書「ペンタゴン・ペーパーズ」を新聞にリークし、米国のベトナム撤退の一因を作ったことで知られる。正義のために身の危険を省みず内部告発した「ウィッスル・ブローアー」として伝説的存在となり、近年「ウィキリークス」のジュリアン・アサンジ、元CIA職員のエドワード・スノウデンらにも影響を与えている。

エルズバーグ氏は核問題の専門家でもあり、今回も開口一番、「自分の人生は核戦争を起こさないという目的のために捧げてきた」と言いきった。戦後の核軍拡競争と核戦争の危機を見つめてきた氏がこのこのインタビューでも上述の会議でも何度も強調していたのが、「今世界はキューバ危機(1962年)以来の核戦争の危機にさらされている」ということだった。そして核戦争を本当に起こすリスクはドナルド・トランプよりもヒラリー・クリントンの方が高いと。

エルズバーグ氏は、オバマ大統領が核先制不使用を検討したことに対し核被害をよく知る日本が反対したことに大変な危惧を抱いていた。核兵器ゼロの目標は重要であるが、喫緊の核戦争のリスクを回避するにはまず、米国がロシアや他国に対し核先制攻撃の脅しを解くことであると強調した。

85歳のエルズバーグ氏はインタビュー中、私を通してすべての日本人に伝えたいと言わんばかりの気迫で、つばがかかりそうな勢いで訴えてきた。「日本こそが米国に核先制不使用を求めるべきだ。安倍首相がどう言おうとも、日本の市民が立ち上がって行動すべきだ」と。

だから私は週刊金曜日の読者以外の人たちにもエルズバーグ氏のメッセージを広く伝えたいのだ。許可をもらって記事を下に張り付けたので、ぜひ読んで拡散してほしい。記事画像をクリックすれば大きく見られる。 乗松聡子

★エルズバーグ氏は核問題を中心とした回顧録をこのたび完成させた。その中には1960年代初頭に岩国沿岸に配備されていた核兵器についての詳しい記述もある。近日中に出版予定。



『核兵器・核実験モニター』第508号を発行しました by limitlesslife
November 15, 2016, 2:45 pm
Filed under: 核(武装、戦争、破局、・・・)
ピースデポより、「核兵器・核実験モニター」のご案内です。
購読お申し込みはこちらhttp://www.peacedepot.org/whatspd/joinus1.htm
3か月より前のバックナンバー(PDF)は
こちら http://www.peacedepot.org/nmtr/bcknmbr1.htmからお読みいただけます。

「モニター」創刊500号を記念して「入会・購読無料キャンペーン」を
  実施しております。
この機会にぜひ、入会・購読をご検討ください!
___________________________________
         核兵器・核実験モニター508号(2016.11.15号)
___________________________________
◆【国連総会第1委員会】 17年「禁止交渉開始」決議を採択
  核兵器廃絶へ歴史的な一歩
  日本の反対は「被爆国」への汚点
  10月27日(日本時間28日未明)、国連総会第1委員会は、核兵器禁止交渉の
  会議を2017年に開催するとする「多国間核軍縮交渉を前進させる」決議案(L.41)
  を123か国の賛成多数で採択した。国際社会は核兵器廃絶に向けて大きな一歩を
  踏み出した。各国の投票態度には、米国などからの激しい抵抗の影響が見て取れ
  る。被爆国日本も米国に追随してか、この歴史的な決議に反対票を投じ、被爆者
  やNGOなどからの強い反発を招いた。せめてもの望みは、日本が交渉に参加して、
  核保有国の条約参加に道を開くような先進的・建設的な提案をすることである。
  <資料1>決議「多国間核軍縮交渉を前進させる」(全訳)
  <資料2>岸田文雄外務大臣記者会見より国連総会第1委員会関連部分(抜粋)
  <資料3>スウェーデンによる「多国間核軍縮交渉を前進させる」決議の投票理由
      説明(抜粋訳)
◆【寄稿】科学技術で拡大する「軍学協同」
     ――9条問題と同質、市民からも議論を   九州大学名誉教授 中山正敏
◆【資料】レイキャビク米ソ首脳会談から30年
     潘基文国連事務総長とゴルバチョフ元書記長の現地での講演(抜粋訳)
  今日の安全保障環境はさらなる核軍縮の追求には機が熟していないと主張する
  人がいるかもしれない。その見方は完全に逆だと私は言いたい。軍備管理と
  軍縮の追求こそが緊張の打破と対立の減少に資する。――潘基文
  核兵器のない世界は理想郷ではなく、むしろ避けられぬ必要だと私は強く確信
  している。元指導者や外交官、科学者、専門家、世界中の市民社会が最も強く
  明白な言葉で『核兵器は禁止されねばならない』と発言するよう促している。
                                 ――ミハイル・ゴルバチョフ
◆【連載「いま語る」68】
  「人間の内面と向きあい平和を築く」
   髙見三明さん(カトリック長崎大司教区大司教、「宗教者声明」呼びかけ人)
◆【日誌】核・ミサイル/沖縄(16年10月21日~11月5日)
-----------------------------------

発行元: NPO法人ピースデポ
〒223-0062 横浜市港北区日吉本町1-30-27-4 日吉グリューネ1F
Tel. 045-563-5101 Fax. 045-563-9907 Website: www.peacedepot.org
Email: office@peacedepot.org
-----------------------------------



トランプの核姿勢ータイムズ・サンガー記事 by limitlesslife
October 1, 2016, 11:33 am
Filed under: 核(武装、戦争、破局、・・・)

9月27日づけの表記記事です。アメリカ大統領選挙には、われわれは、手も足もだせませんが、今後の核廃絶を左右する一大事です。どうしましょう?
邦訳を下記に置きます。ご感想をいただければ幸いです。
渡植貞一郎
http://nuke-weapon-timeline.news.coocan.jp/times/TrumpNukeNYTimes.html

MLホームページ: http://www.freeml.com/abolition-japan



ヒロシマ:支払い続ける犯罪だが、決算に注意せよ! by limitlesslife

Hiroshima: the Crime That Keeps on Paying, But Beware the Reckoning

Everett Historical / Shutterstock.com

On his visit to Hiroshima last May, Obama did not, as some had vainly hoped he might, apologize for the August 6, 1945 atomic bombing of the city. Instead he gave a high-sounding speech against war. He did this as he was waging ongoing drone war against defenseless enemies in faraway countries and approving plans to spend a trillion dollarsupgrading the US nuclear arsenal.

An apology would have been as useless as his speech. Empty words don’t change anything. But here was one thing that Obama could have said that would have had a real impact: he could have told the truth.

He could have said:

“The atom bombs were not dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ‘to save lives by ending the war’. That was an official lie. The bombs were dropped to see how they worked and to show the world that the United States possessed unlimited destructive power.”

There was no chance that Obama would say that. Officially, the bombing “saved lives” and therefore, it was worth it. Like the Vietnamese villages we destroyed in order to save them, like the countless Iraqi children who died as a result of US sanctions, the hundreds of thousands of agonizing women and children in two Japanese cities remain on the debit side of the United States accounts with humanity, unpaid and unpunished.

“It Was Worth It”

The decision to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a political not a military decision. The targets were not military, the effects were notmilitary. The attacks were carried out against the wishes of all major military leaders. Admiral William Leahy, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in his memoirs that “the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender…” General Eisenhower, General MacArthur, even General Hap Arnold, commander of the Air Force, were opposed. Japan was already devastated by fire bombing, facing mass hunger from the US naval blockade, demoralized by the surrender of its German ally, and fearful of an imminent Russian attack. In reality, the war was over. All top U.S. leaders knew that Japan was defeated and was seeking to surrender.

The decision to use the atom bombs was a purely political decision taken almost solely by two politicians alone: the poker-playing novice President and his mentor, Secretary of State James F. Byrnes.[1]

President Harry S. Truman was meeting with Churchill and Stalin in the Berlin suburbJohnstone-Queen-Cover-ak800--291x450 of Potsdam when secret news came that the New Mexico test of the atomic bomb was a success. Observers recall that Truman was “a changed man”, euphoric with the possession of such power. While more profound men shuddered at the implications of this destructive force, to Truman and his “conniving” Secretary of State, James Byrnes, the message was: “Now we can get away with everything.”

They proceeded to act on that assumption – first of all in their relations with Moscow.

In response to months of U.S. urging, Stalin promised to enter the Asian war three months after the defeat of Nazi Germany, which occurred in early May 1945. It was well known that the Japanese occupation forces in China and Manchuria could not resist the Red Army. It was understood that two things could bring about Japan’s immediate surrender: Russia’s entrance into the war and U.S. assurance that the royal family would not be treated as war criminals.

Both these things happened in the days right after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But they were overshadowed by the atom bomb.

And that was the point.

That way, the U.S. atom bombs got full credit for ending the war.

But that is not all.

The demonstrated possession of such a weapon gave Truman and Byrnes such a sense of power that they could abandon previous promises to the Russians and attempt to bully Moscow in Europe. In that sense, the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki not only gratuitously killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. They also started the Cold War.

Hiroshima and the Cold War

A most significant observation on the effects of the atomic bomb is attributed to General Dwight D. Eisenhower. As his son recounted, he was deeply depressed on learning at the last minute of plans to use the bomb. Shortly after Hiroshima, Eisenhower is reported to have said privately:

“Before the bomb was used, I would have said yes, I was sure we could keep the peace with Russia. Now, I don’t know. Until now I would have said that we three, Britain with her mighty fleet, America with the strongest air force, and Russia with the strongest land force on the continent, we three could have guaranteed the peace of the world for a long, long time to come. But now, I don’t know. People are frightened and disturbed all over. Everyone feels insecure again.”[2]

As supreme allied commander in Europe, Eisenhower had learned that it was possible to work with the Russians. US and USSR domestic economic and political systems were totally different, but on the world stage they could cooperate. As allies, the differences between them were mostly a matter of mistrust, matters that could be patched up.

The victorious Soviet Union was devastated from the war: cities in ruins, some twenty million dead. The Russians wanted help to rebuild. Previously, under Roosevelt, it had been agreed that the Soviet Union would get reparations from Germany, as well as credits from the United States. Suddenly, this was off the agenda. As news came in of the successful New Mexico test, Truman exclaimed: “This will keep the Russians straight.” Because they suddenly felt all-powerful, Truman and Byrnes decided to get tough with the Russians.

Stalin was told that Russia could take reparations only from the largely agricultural eastern part of Germany under Red Army occupation. This was the first step in the division of Germany, which Moscow actually opposed.

Since several of the Eastern European countries had been allied to Nazi Germany, and contained strong anti-Russian elements, Stalin’s only condition for those countries (then occupied by the Red Army) was that their governments should not be actively hostile to the USSR. For that, Moscow favored the formula “People’s Democracies” meaning coalitions excluding extreme right parties.

Feeling all-powerful, the United States sharpened its demands for “free elections” in hope of installing anti-communist governments. This backfired. Instead of giving in to the implicit atomic threat, the Soviet Union dug in its heels. Instead of loosening political control of Eastern Europe, Moscow imposed Communist Party regimes – and accelerated its own atomic bomb program. The nuclear arms race was on.

“Have Our Cake and Eat It”

John J. McCloy, labeled by his biographer Kai Bird as the informal “chairman of the U.S. establishment”, told Secretary of War Henry Stimson at the time that: “I’ve been taking the position that we ought to have our cake and eat it too; that we ought to be free to operate under this regional arrangement in South America, at the same time intervene promptly in Europe; that we oughtn’t to give away either asset…”[3] Stimson replied, “I think so, decidedly.”

In short, the United States was to retain its sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere, claimed by the Monroe Doctrine, while depriving Russia of its own buffer zone.

It is necessary to recognize the sharp distinction between domestic policy and foreign policy. The nature of the Soviet internal regime may have been as bad as it is portrayed, but when it came to foreign policy, Stalin scrupulously respected deals made with the Western allies – abandoning, for instance, the Greek Communists as they were crushed by the Anglo-Americans after the war. It was the United States that reneged on the deals made at Yalta, which were then stigmatized as sellouts to “communist aggression”. Stalin had absolutely no desire to promote communist revolution in Western Europe, much less to invade those countries. In fact his failure to promote world revolution was precisely the basis of the campaign against “Stalinism” by Trotskyists – including Trotskyists whose devotion to world revolution has now shifted to promotion of US “regime change” wars.

There is a prevailing Western doctrine that dictatorships make war, and democracies make peace. There is no proof of that whatsoever. Dictatorships (think of Franco Spain) may be conservative and inward-looking. The major imperialist powers, Britain and France, were democracies. Democratic America is far from peaceful.

As the Soviet Union developed its own nuclear arsenal, the United States was unable to interfere effectively in Eastern Europe and fell back on lesser enemies, overthrowing governments in Iran and Guatemala, getting bogged down in Vietnam, on the theory that these were surrogates for the Soviet communist enemy. But now that the Soviet Union has collapsed, abandoning Russia’s buffer zone in Eastern Europe, there appears to be a resurge of the sort of confidence that overcame Truman: a euphoria of limitless power. Why else would the Pentagon undertake a trillion dollar program to renew America’s nuclear arsenal, while stationing troops and aggressive military equipment as close as possible to the Russian border?

In his 1974 book about his relations with his brother Dwight, The President Is Calling, Milton Eisenhower wrote: “Our employment of this new force at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a supreme provocation to other nations, especially the Soviet Union.” And he added, “Certainly what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki will forever be on the conscience of the American people.”

Alas, the evidence so far is all to the contrary. Concerned critics have been marginalized. Systematic official lies about the “necessity to save American lives” have left the collective American conscience perfectly clear, while the power of the Bomb has created a lasting sense of self-righteous “exceptionalism” in the nation’s leaders. We Americans alone can do what others cannot, because we are “free” and “democratic” and they – if we so decide – are not. Other countries, not being “democracies”, can be destroyed in order to liberate them. Or simply destroyed. This is the bottom line of the “exceptionalism” that substitutes in Washington for the “conscience of the American people” which was not aroused by Hiroshima, but asphyxiated.

The Moral Sleep

As a guest in Hiroshima, Obama pontificated skillfully:

“The wars of the modern age teach us this truth. Hiroshima teaches this truth. Technological progress without an equivalent progress in human institutions can doom us. The scientific revolution that led to the splitting of an atom requires a moral revolution as well.”

Well yes, but no such moral revolution has taken place.

“…the memory of the morning of Aug. 6, 1945, must never fade. That memory allows us to fight complacency. It fuels our moral imagination. It allows us to change.”

“Change” is an Obama specialty. But he did nothing to change our nuclear arms policy, except to beef it up. No sign of a “moral imagination” imagining the devastation that this policy is leading us toward. No imaginative ideas to bring about nuclear disarmament. Just promises not to let the bad guys get ahold of them. They belong to us.

“And since that fateful day,” Obama continued, “we have made choices that give us hope. The United States and Japan have forged not only an alliance but a friendship that has won far more for our people than we could ever claim through war.”

This is sinister. As a matter of fact, it was precisely through war that the U.S. forged this alliance and this friendship – which the United States is now trying to militarize in its “Asian pivot”. It means that we can wipe out two of a country’s cities with nuclear weapons and end up with “not only an alliance but a friendship”. So why stop now? Why not make more such “friends” in the same way, for instance in Iran, which Hillary Clinton has expressed willingness to “obliterate” if the circumstances are right.

“That is a future we can choose,” said Obama, “a future in which Hiroshima and Nagasaki are known not as the dawn of atomic warfare but as the start of our own moral awakening.”

But so far, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are very far from marking the “start of our own moral awakening”. On the contrary. The illusion of possessing limitless power removed any need for critical self-examination, any need to make a real effort to understand others who are not like us and don’t want to be like us, but could share the planet peacefully if we would leave them alone.

Since we are all-powerful, we must be a force for good. In reality, we are neither. But we seem incapable of recognizing the limits of our “exceptionalism”.

The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki plunged the United States leadership into a moral sleep from which it has yet to awaken.

Notes.

[1] All of that is known to experts. The documentary proofs were all laid out by Gar Alperovitz in the 800 pages of his 1995 book, The Decision to Use the Atom Bomb. However, official lies outlive documented refutation.

[2] Alperovitz pp 352-3.

[3] Ibid p.254.

More articles by:


核兵器の人的コスト by limitlesslife
July 19, 2016, 5:06 am
Filed under: 核(武装、戦争、破局、・・・)

human cost of nuclear weapons

赤十字国際レビュー誌が核兵器の人道上の影響に関する特集号を組んだとのこと
です! 川崎哲

Forwarded by Akira Kawasaki <kawasaki@peaceboat.gr.jp>
———————– Original Message ———————–
From:    Tilman Alfred Ruff <tar@unimelb.edu.au>
To:      “ican-campaigners@googlegroups.com” <ican-campaigners@googlegroups.com>
Date:    Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:58:20 +0000
Subject: [ICAN] human cost of nuclear weapons
—-

The 468 page International Review of the Red Cross special issue on the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons is now finally freely available gratis on the ICRC website – https://www.icrc.org/en/international-review
Some excellent papers and I think the most definitive review of the humanitarian initiative to date. ICAN features quite prominently in a number of papers.
Please share/use

Best wishes
tilman


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “ICAN Campaigners” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ican-campaigners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ican-campaigners@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

——————— Original Message Ends ——————–

MLホームページ: http://www.freeml.com/abolition-japan