Trump completely lacked an exit strategy when he pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal and made the decision out of pure animosity towards his predecessor, the ex-UK ambassador to the US said, according to a new embarrassing leak.
Desperate to save the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), then-UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson flew to the US in May 2018 to persuade President Donald Trump to abide by the accord. Despite intense negotiations at the White House with Trump’s closest aides that lasted for 26 hours, Johnson returned empty-handed, simply because Trump wanted to spite Barack Obama for negotiating the agreement, the UK’s former ambassador to the US, Sir Kim Darroch, told 10 Downing Street, according to a leaked diplomatic cable published by the Mail on Sunday.
The Administration is set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism, seemingly for ideological and personality reasons – it was Obama’s deal.
The cable sent out on May 8 last year also claimed that the White House had lacked any strategy on how to handle the withdrawal and suggested that there were strong disagreements among Trump’s closest advisers.
They can’t articulate any ‘day-after’ strategy; and contacts with State Department this morning suggest no sort of plan for reaching out to partners and allies, whether in Europe or the region.
In another cable sent out the same day, Sir Darroch blamed Trump for following the line of National Security Advisor John Bolton, who promulgated withdrawal from the deal and the re-imposition of sanctions.
The British tabloid went on to release the second batch of Sir Darroch’s wires despite the warning by the Metropolitan Police not to publish the government leaks. The initial publication of cables last week caused a diplomatic scandal between Washington and the UK. It resulted in Sir Darroch’s resignation on Wednesday, after Trump unleashed a salvo of attacks against the diplomat, who described his administration as “dysfunctional” and “inept.” The Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command is now investigating the source of the leak.
BRUSSELS (Sputnik) – Russia will ignore US sanctions against Iran and continue to trade with the Middle Eastern nation without creating any special mechanisms, Russian Permanent Representative to the European Union Vladimir Chizhov told Sputnik.
“Our colleagues here [in Brussels] sometimes ask why Russia and China do not create their own INSTEX [Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges]. To that we answer with the question: why do we need it? We have Finland already traded and will trade without paying any attention to US sanctions,” Chizhov said.
The day before, the Finnish government said that it was considering joining a trading system that core EU members set up to bypass US sanctions on Iran.
Last year, the United States reimposed sanctions on Iran’s financial and energy sectors that were initially waived under a 2015 nuclear deal.
In January, France, Germany and the United Kingdom set up INSTEX in order to ease non-dollar trade with Tehran in the wake of these sanctions. Following a meeting of the Joint Commission of the Iranian nuclear deal in June, the mechanism became operational and available to all EU member states.
A deputy Iranian foreign minister urges the international community to stand up to the United States’ use of dollar as a weapon.
“The international community should confront this wrongful habit of the US to use the power of dollar as a weapon against independent countries,” Abbas Araqchi said.
The official was addressing a conference dubbed the International Seminar on Unilateral Coercive Measures and Their Impacts convened jointly by Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela in Vienna on Thursday. The event was attended by foreign diplomats, representatives of international organizations, media representatives, experts, and researchers.
“The US’s destructive behavior and its economic terrorism against the Islamic Republic have to stop,” he added.
The US has engaged in a campaign of “maximum pressure” against Iran under President Donald Trump. The campaign has seen Washington returning its sanctions against Tehran and enlisting the assistance of its Western and regional allies in enforcing economic pressure on the country.
Araqchi also referred to the US’s last year departure from a nuclear accord between Iran and six world powers, which has been endorsed in the form of a United Nations Security Council resolution.
“By flouting the Security Council resolution and implementing illegal and unilateral sanctions, the US has placed the only product of diplomacy in our region on the brink of destruction,” he stated.
The remarks were echoed by Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who said despite the US claims that it is imposing sanctions on Iran as an alternative to war, those sanctions actually amount to a full-fledged economic war against the Islamic Republic.
Iran’s downing of a US military surveillance drone last week predictably led to another flare-up in tense relations between Tehran and Washington. What could be the implications of a potential conflict between the two nations?
Right after the Global Hawk UAV was shot down, the New York Times reported that US President Donald Trump approved military strikes against Iran, but then changed his mind.
Let’s start by saying that the decision to launch a military operation against Iran (which is what this is really about), including the specific time and place, would have to be taken by a very small group of top US political and military officials. At such meetings, no leaks could possibly occur by definition.
Now, let’s take a look at some of the details. The difference between a ‘strike’ and an ‘operation’ is quite significant, at the very least in terms of duration, and forces and equipment involved. It would be nice to know if the NYT actually meant a single airstrike or an entire air operation.
Amusingly enough, the publication reported that the strikes were scheduled for early morning to minimize the potential death toll among the Iranian military and civilians. It’s worth pointing out that the US has never cared about the number of victims either among the military personnel or the civilian population of its adversaries.
Moreover, the purpose of any military conflict is to do as much damage to your enemy as possible in terms of personnel, military hardware and other equipment. This is how the goals of any armed conflict are achieved. Of course, it would be best if civilian losses are kept to a minimum, but for the US it’s more of a secondary rather than a primary objective.
The US Navy and Air Force traditionally strike before dawn with one purpose alone – to avoid the antiaircraft artillery (both small and medium-caliber), as well as a number of air defense systems with optical tracking, firing at them. Besides, a strike in the dark hours of the day affects the morale of the enemy personnel.
Here we need to understand that Iran would instantly retaliate, and Tehran has no small capabilities for that. In other words, it would be a full-scale war. For the US, it wouldn’t end with one surgical airstrike without consequences, like in Syria. And the US seems to have a very vague idea on what a military victory over Iran would look like.
There is no doubt that a prolonged air campaign by the US will greatly undermine Iran’s military and economic potential and reduce the country to the likes of Afghanistan, completely destroying its hydrocarbon production and exports industries.
To say how long such a campaign could last would be too much of a wild guess, but we have the examples of Operation Desert Storm in 1991 when airstrikes lasted for 38 days, and Yugoslavia in 1991 when the bombing continued for 78 days. So, theoretically, the US could bomb Iran for, say, 100 days, wrecking the country’s economy and infrastructure step by step.
However, the price the US would have to pay for starting such a military conflict may turn out to be too high.
For instance, Iran can respond to US aggression by launching intermediate and shorter-range ballistic missiles to target oil and gas fields and terminals in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the UAE.
Should such a war really happen, the stakes would be very high, so there is every reason to assume that Iran’s missiles would not only be equipped with conventional high explosive fragmentation warheads but would also carry toxic agents and dirty bombs.
Firstly, it should be pointed out that even though the capabilities of US intelligence agencies are almost limitless, quite a few Iranian missile launching sites remain undiscovered. Secondly, US air defense systems in the Persian Gulf, no matter how effective, would not shoot down every last Iranian missile. And even a handful of Tehran’s missiles reaching critical infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region would be enough to cause devastation.
On top of that, there are more questions than answers regarding the reliability of the anti-missile and air defense systems that the Persian Gulf monarchies deployed to defend their hydrocarbon terminals and other oil and gas infrastructure.
If such a scenario came true, that would bring inconceivable chaos to the global economy and would immediately drive up oil prices to $200-250 per barrel – and that’s the lowest estimate. It is these implications that are most likely keeping the US from attacking Iran.
To solve the problem of Iran once and for all, the US would need to mount a large-scale ground operation, with the US Army invading the country. America would have to wipe out both regular Iranian forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, unseat the current leadership of Iran, and have a military presence in every major city for the next 10 to 15 years, keeping tight control over the entire country at the same time.
For the record, the US failed to do that even in Afghanistan, which is several times smaller than Iran in terms of both territory and population. And almost 18 years of fighting later, the US has achieved next to nothing.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
It is one thing watching the news, such as it is, a mix of conspiracy theories, flummery and distraction but quite something else watching the United States under its current regime wage war and politics.
We haven’t seen this kind of theatre since Goebbels, Himmler and Von Ribbentrop.
How does one describe Secretary of State Pompeo’s trip to Iraq in early May 2019? Do remember that the United States already murdered two million Iraqi civilians, that was done openly and many of those who planned that fake war backed by fake intelligence now advise Trump, names like “John Bolton” for instance.
The blubbering monstrosity Pompeo, reeling from a failed coup attempt in Venezuela, lands in Baghdad to threaten the Iraqis with 4 nuclear-armed B 52s and an American aircraft carrier “racing to the scene.”
Why? The answer is simple, and Trump openly admits it, the Israelis told them to do it. Ouch!
How about Israel? Problems there? Didn’t several hundred rockets just land somewhere inside Israel?
Didn’t their US financed “Iron Dome” missile defense system utterly fail?
More than that, something else far more serious was exposed. Not one social media post, not one photo, no interviews, not even a phone call to relatives in the United States was made from Israel regarding these attacks.
To be clear, the attacks were in retaliation for the killing of Palestinian protesters by not just IDF forces but armed Israeli civilians.
As an aside, the real threat isn’t from inside Israel, a proven total surveillance state capable of unprecedented tyranny, but that Israel’s model is being sold to nations around the world, particularly the United States, where Facebook and Google, two companies controlled by Israeli passport holders, are leading the way to a draconian society with few nations holding the line.
That those nations are either bombed or sanctioned or both by the United States is telling.
Tyranny as Patriotism
The assumptions aren’t just wrong, they are ignorance in its purest form. Hiding behind patriotic songs, pompous rhetoric and always “hugging the flag,” America is a nation run by gangsters. Was it always that way? To an extent, that answer would be yes, but even the criminal elites, the slave traders, opium shippers, land speculators and robber barons of American history would never have imagined what today has brought.
The world is terrified of America. It is one thing for a nuclear superpower to bully the world on behalf of the wealthy elites that own America’s government. When those elites run every government, not just the US, but Europe as well, Africa and Latin America, much of Asia too, and stage fake wars, quite probably fake terror attacks, mass murders, and many suspect so-called “natural disasters,” we are in uncharted waters here.
Every advancement in science and technology is placed into the waiting hands of, well who? We can thank the controlled media, another equally theatrical organization dominated by fake opposing sides tasked with polarizing the public on issues like abortion rights, vaccinations, racial hatred and class envy, with making a Frankensteinian world possible.
The Threat of Science and Technology
Many are aware that, during World War II, science was pushed to new depths. In America it was the Manhattan Project, creating a capability of incinerating entire cities and making much of the earth’s surface uninhabitable.
In Japan, among their efforts was a biological weapons program under “Unit 731.” Headquartered in China, the Japanese developed weaponized forms of the most virulent diseases known to man, tested them on the Chinese along with American prisoners of war, and unleashed them on the world with limited success. Japan even tried spreading the Black Plague to the United States by attaching infected rats to balloons.
Japan also had a nuclear program and built several very large submarines capable of delivering aircraft off the US coast in order to do to America exactly what it did to Japan. There are records, still classified, that show both Japan and Germany exploding nuclear devices during the closing days of World War II.
Anecdotally, uranium oxide from Germany, destined for Japan by submarine in April 1945, to be used against the United States, was diverted to the Manhattan project with the vessel carrying it, the U234, docked at Portsmouth, New Hampshire. There are many such untold stories from World War II, and here is why some of them matter so much.
Let’s look at Unit 731. What happened to the scientists, the war criminals, who unleashed the plague on China’s cities? They came to the US under “Operation Paperclip,” under the auspices of CIA founder Allen Dulles and his assistant, a young Naval officer, Richard Millhouse Nixon. This was the origin of the American biological warfare program that now runs allegedly “peaceful” labs around the world in places like Tbilisi, Georgia.
These facilities are part of the reason so many fear the US. Information on the real research is more than rumors. We know the US has been collecting DNA samples from specific “target” populations, particularly in the Russian Federation, collected and collated by the same organizations that are capable of creating “designer disease.”
In fact, this capability comes up in publications, demonstrating the frightening capability of tying genetically modified diseases to racial and/or ethnic markers in human DNA.
An Ethnically Cleansed Planet
Real or not, there are wide perceptions at government level, across Africa for certain but elsewhere as well, that “weaponized medical science” is misusing research into vaccines and studies of genetics to create a world as envisioned by eugenicists in the late 19th and early 20th century.
A movement funded by the wealthiest American families, America began sterilizing its “unfit,” based on race, religion or even social gossip. From Indy Week:
“In Britain, eugenic thought was more of an abstract concept of a utopian society that would prove difficult to put into practice. However, eugenic ideology found fertile ground across the Atlantic in the United States. With the rising influx of immigrants after 1890, increased urbanization and related social ills, people needed a promise of stability and a better future.
“Eugenics seemed to have the answers. During its heyday, it enjoyed broad support across a variety of social and political spectrums: from social reformers and humanitarians to staunch racists, from strict conservatives to progressives, and from academic and medical communities to religious circles.
“And it had the financial backing of some of the wealthiest capitalists in the country, including the Kellogg, Carnegie, and Harriman family fortunes.”
A national Eugenics Record Office was established in 1910 to collect pedigrees of families suspected of carrying defective genes, and several organizations were formed to promote the study and practice of eugenics. These organizations would sponsor “Better Babies” and “Fitter Families” contests at state fairs across the country. Eugenics exhibits proclaimed “Some people are born to be a burden on the rest, ” with a flashing light going off every 16 seconds to signal the birth of another possibly defective human.
Eugenic sermon contests were held across the nation, and biblical passages were quickly reinterpreted to show how eugenics was perfectly compatible with Christian thought. Indeed, advocates claimed, Jesus himself was a eugenicist, according to Christine Rosen’s book, Preaching Eugenics. Scary stories about degenerate family lines sometimes completely fabricated were widely disseminated.
Although eugenics may have started out as a serious science, and elements of it would later shift to the valuable studies of genetics and heredity, the ideology was hijacked by people who knew little about the science and needed a reason to justify their own prejudices.
The national Eugenics Record Office would spend years amassing volumes of data on individuals and families, combining “equal portions of gossip, race prejudice, sloppy methods and leaps of logic, all caulked together by elements of actual genetic knowledge to create the glitter of a genuine science,” Edwin Black writes in War Against the Weak.
The goal of the eugenics movement in the United States was to get rid of the “bottom tenth” of society. This, eugenicists hoped to accomplish through restrictive immigration laws, miscegenation laws and forced sterilizations of the unfit. The “fit” of society were imagined as healthy, white, middle-class or higher, educated, English-speaking Protestants bearing a remarkable resemblance to the eugenicists who defined the word “fit.’”
Still the Same Game?
Were one to delve into a darker view of geopolitics than is normally publicly espoused, one where governments, perhaps themselves controlled by what is now termed the Deep State, act in a broadly criminal manner, a pattern emerges. Not all patterns are viable, some if not most are agenda driven and data is always subjective, with fakery and propaganda working its way into the accepted narrative.
ONE MIGHT EVEN GO FURTHER, THAT THE “ACCEPTED NARRATIVE” IS, IN ITSELF, ONLY FAKERY AND PROPAGANDA. IN FACT, STRINGENTLY FOCUSED ANALYTICAL MODELS REVEAL EXACTLY THIS TRUTH.
What is clear is that policies are being enacted that favor lower birth rates in developing nations due to poverty, disease and war.
Moreover, there is a wealth of evidence that scientific research and technological development doesn’t stop at social engineering or even “thought control.” Modeling reveals a broad agenda of capabilities that mirrors the values of those oligarchical elites that so long ago decided a “custom bred” humanity of mindless drones controlled by elites is the only desirable future for mankind.
Thus, when the CIA or USAID builds mysterious laboratories in the dark recesses of the world, Romania, Tbilisi, Georgia, Southern Libya yet no research is published and the only “output” is occasional outbreaks of genetically engineered experimental diseases, fears and suspicions become reality.
One must remember, and this is fact, not conjecture, that the origin of Hitler’s Germany traces to Americans. Hitler’s race laws originated in America and Hitler was long a student of America’s “Black Stork” laws that mandated killing unfit children. From the Guardian:
“VARIOUS METHODS OF EUGENIC EUTHANASIA – INCLUDING GASSING THE UNWANTED IN LETHAL CHAMBERS – WERE A PART OF EVERYDAY AMERICAN PARLANCE AND ETHICAL DEBATE SOME TWO DECADES BEFORE NEVADA APPROVED THE FIRST SUCH CHAMBER FOR CRIMINAL EXECUTIONS IN 1921.
Hitler proudly told his comrades how closely he followed American eugenic legislation.
‘Now that we know the laws of heredity,’ he told a fellow Nazi, ‘it is possible to a large extent to prevent unhealthy and severely handicapped beings from coming into the world. I have studied with interest the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.’”
Looking at who overtly rules America today, giving no credence to claims of a Deep State or secret societies, we are still faced with overwhelming proof that the “American democracy” is controlled by oligarchical hereditary elites that favor ethnic cleansing and elimination of those they deem unfit.
Though the seats of government may be held by those with different names, the money behind them, the think tanks, the fake institutes, are all under control by these forces.
The policies? Open ethnic cleansing for sure, overtly through sanctions and war, less openly through supporting clearly fascistic regimes around the world, a policy America adopted long ago.
When the reins of control in Washington fall into the hands of right-wing extremists, these policies which are always present go a step further, as is now being seen under the Trump regime.
As Trump will be attending the 75th anniversary of the D Day landings in France, a real examination of that war and Hitler’s truncated rule of Europe, would reveal how not only did Hitler follow policies learned from America but how he was funded by Americans as well, from his earliest career to continued full partnership in war industries right up until the end of the war.
It would not be inaccurate to call Hitler a failed American experiment, one like so many others, Diem in Vietnam, the repressive regimes in South Korea, Chaing in China and ten dozen “tin pot” dictators placed in power by the CIA, with that list growing each day.
The goal? Technology and science wielded to create a world envisioned long ago, one with few people, endless power for the debauched few where the self-anointed “high born” could look down from their lofty heights on humanity as though it were a giant ant farm.
Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
“The Middle East is war-torn and conflict-ridden as a direct result of meddling US imperialism over seven decades since the end of World War Two. Under Trump, the usual American recklessness is going nuclear.”
Former editor and writer for major news media organizations. He has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages
June 17, 2019
US media reports have claimed that China is helping to expand Saudi Arabia’s ballistic missile arsenal. The implication from the US media is that Beijing is recklessly stoking tensions in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
China has denied it is involved in supplying the Saudis with ballistic technology. However, various US “experts” are cited by American media claiming that satellite images indicate that alleged ballistic missile sites in Saudi Arabia appear to be sourced from China.
Given the bombed-out credibility of US media, as demonstrated by a myriad of subjects, from alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to hysterical, baseless claims about “Russian meddling” in elections, the watchword here is very much “skepticism” towards American media reports.
What seems immediately incongruous about the purported Chinese ballistic missiles to Saudi Arabia is the fact that Beijing has otherwise shown itself to be a stalwart ally of Iran in recent years. China is a major importer of Iranian oil as well as investor in exploring Iran’s vast natural gas reserves. Looking to the future, China and Iran view each other as strategic partners for mutual development. Iran has embraced the Chinese “Belt and Road Initiative” linking Eurasian economies, and will be a pivotal player in paving the new silk trade routes between Asia and Europe.
After the Trump administration unilaterally trashed the 2015 international nuclear accord with Iran, China has, along with Russia, been a staunch advocate for upholding the treaty. China continues to buy Iranian exports of crude oil despite Washington’s threats of punitive sanctions.
In this geopolitical context, it therefore seems doubtful, if not implausible, that China would put its strategic relationship with Iran at risk by allegedly supplying ballistic missiles to Iran’s archenemy Saudi Arabia. Beijing would be well aware that Tehran would view such a development as a form of treachery, thus jeopardizing the strategic partnership between Iran and China.
It is true that Saudi Arabia is also a major oil exporter to China’s voracious consumer market. All’s fair in business, we may suppose. But for Beijing to start supplying ballistic missiles to the Saudis, especially at such a precarious time for Iran, seems like a conceptual bridge too far.
The other thing is that the Iranians have not publicly expressed any misgivings about the reports alleging China’s support for Saudi missile development. That suggests the reports are baseless, just as the Chinese government has been insisting.
So, what is going on here?
It seems significant that Washington is in the midst of a trade-war showdown with China. The trade war is only part of a bigger geo-strategic confrontation between the waning American empire and re-emerging powers such as China and Russia.
Trump is demanding China make major concessions to benefit the US economy.
It is thus in Washington’s interest to try every dirty trick as a way to undermine China, just as it has done with Russia over any number of slanderous claims.
China being blamed for stoking Middle East tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran would fit the bill for a campaign of media slander.
The irony of this, of course, is that it’s Washington that is the party which is actually inflaming tensions in the region.
The Trump administration is provoking Iran with military threats, baseless accusations about “sponsoring terrorism” and strangling the nation with illegal sanctions, otherwise known as “economic terrorism”.
Not only that, but the Trump administration is piling billions of dollars of weapons into Saudi Arabia in defiance of the US Congress imposing restrictions due to the horror of the Saudi air war in Yemen and atrocious human rights conditions within the kingdom.
Furthermore – and this is astounding in its recklessness – the Trump administration appears to be helping Saudi Arabia develop nuclear weapons. There are credible reports that President Trump is permitting US nuclear power companies to share sensitive technology with the Saudis that could be used in the future to build weapons of mass destruction. Such a move is in violation of the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) forbidding nuclear-armed powers from propagating this weaponry.
(Bear in the mind too that this is the same US administration which has discarded the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty with Russia and is set to do likewise with the New START treaty governing intercontinental weapons.)
This is the real scandal about Middle East tensions. The Trump administration is willfully and illegally changing the strategic balance in the region by seemingly paving the way for Saudi Arabia to obtain nuclear weapons. If that transpires, then Iran may have to, by necessity, forego its non-nuclear doctrine and eventually build the bomb as a matter of survival given the existential threat posed by the Wahhabi Saudi regime and its irrational hostility towards Shia Iran.
The recent alignment between Saudi rulers and US historically nuclear-armed Israel – cemented by the Trump White House – is further cause for apprehension in Tehran.
The Trump administration is criminally fueling an arms race and even more conflicts in the Middle East; possibly a cataclysmic war. But, in truth, this has always been the pernicious role of the US in this blighted region. The Middle East is war-torn and conflict-ridden as a direct result of meddling US imperialism over seven decades since the end of World War Two. Under Trump, the usual American recklessness is going nuclear.
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
Debates over pressing issues such as climate change, healthcare and global poverty will ultimately be rendered pointless if crazed neocons decide to make the world uninhabitable by launching a nuclear war.
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Doomsday Clock is still 2 minutes to midnight – a new abnormal. Having become disillusioned with this particular noteworthy development being buried under the media’s radar for far too long, director of the UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) Renata Dwan has spoken out against the threat of nuclear war, calling it an “urgent” issue that the world should take more seriously.
To be fair, we live in a world where the people will only take an issue seriously if they are told to take it seriously – by the media. The risk of nuclear warfare is no exception, despite its catastrophic consequences. If you want people to understand the urgent threat nuclear arms pose to the world, the media would do well to start talking about it more.
According to Dwan, all states with nuclear weapons are in the process of modernizing their nuclear weapons, which in turn is changing the arms control landscape. She also believes this is partially due to growing competition between China and the United States.
“I think that it’s genuinely a call to recognize – and this has been somewhat missing in the media coverage of the issues – that the risks of nuclear war are particularly high now, and the risks of the use of nuclear weapons, for some of the factors I pointed out, are higher now than at any time since World War Two,” Dwan said.
Albert Einstein once famously said: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
To launch a nuclear war is to launch the unthinkable. Unfortunately, unthinking is all too common in the age of Donald Trump, so we have to be even more vigilant about this issue than we ordinarily would (that isn’t to say we shouldn’t have been vigilant under Clinton, Bush and Obama, all of whomlaunched disastrous wars of aggression without a legal basis).
If Washington launched a nuclear war against Russia and China, the bombing alone is estimated to kill at least 335 million people within the first seventy-two hours (this estimate was calculated as far back as 1962, meaning the number is surely higher today). As former Pentagon consultant and whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg once explained, these deaths are merely the beginning:
“Well, then I asked, ‘All right, how many altogether’ And a few days later, 100 million in East Europe, the captive nations, another 100 million in West Europe, our allies, from our own strikes, by fallout, depending on which way the wind blew, and, however the wind blew, a third 100 million in adjoining countries, neutral countries, like Austria and Finland, or Afghanistan then, Japan, northern India and so forth — a total of 600 million people. That was a time, by the way, when the population of the world was 3 billion. And that was an underestimate of their casualties — a hundred Holocausts.”
These numbers also don’t take into account the number of people who would die gradually and overtime from the aftermath, which would likely surpass the amount killed in the attack itself. If entire cities are destroyed, who will treat the wounded, feed the remaining people, provide shelter, and the like?
If right-wingers think the refugee crisis is bad now, they should be doing their utmost to prevent such a catastrophe from ever occurring. Yet, despite these damning figures, a survey conducted in 2017 suggested that the majority of Americans would approve of a nuclear strike against an adversarial state such as Iran, killing 2 million civilians in the process so as long as it saved American lives in the long run.
As it transpires, nuclear weapons have lost the taboo that existed after the horrors of the US attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As Brian Toon, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Colorado bluntly admitted, people today are just not confronting themselves with the facts.
“They think nuclear weapons are just big bombs that blow up lots of people,” the professor said, “without considering the way a nuclear conflict – even a ‘small’ one involving some 10 percent of the US arsenal — might poison millions of men, women and children and change the climate enough to starve hundreds of millions.”
The United States has been using nuclear weapons for decades
Former Secretary of State under Donald Trump Rex Tillerson once allegedly called Trump a “f***ing moron” when the President had asked three times in a meeting “if we have nuclear weapons, why don’t we use them?”
When this proposition was put to Daniel Ellsberg in an interview with Democracy Now! Ellsberg stated that it is not a question of whether or not Trump might use nuclear weapons – he already is.
“It’s not a question of whether the president might use them,” Ellsberg stated. “He’s using them the way you use a gun when you point it at somebody in a confrontation, whether or not you pull the trigger…as in NATO. I think the — one of our commanders just said, ‘Oh, we use the weapons every day, every hour of the day,’ which is true. We use them on the hip.”
This is not an issue of the recklessness of Donald Trump versus the unknown depths of an unhinged leader of a so-called rogue state like North Korea. We must bear in mind that in all actuality, the US has been using its nuclear weapons supply to achieve its own ends for decades.
In the case of Iraq and Libya, most of Washington’s adversaries have concluded that these countries were not attacked because they had weapons of mass destruction or posed any significant threat to the world – but in fact, because they didn’t.
According to North Korea’s Foreign Ministry, “[T]he Libyan crisis is teaching the international community a grave lesson,” which was that Libya’s decision to abandon its weapons programs in 2003, applauded by George W Bush, had been “an invasion tactic to disarm the country.”
The same can equally be said about Trump’s recent threats towards Iran, in which he took to his infamous Twitter account to threaten that “if Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran.” This isn’t a bully at school threatening a weaker child with violence – we all know what he is referring to. Seeing as Iran doesn’t actually have nuclear weapons, any surviving historians will remember who led the world towards a nuclear holocaust.
The current president certainly wears his nuclear weapons supply on his hip, and with crazed advisors like Bolton pushing up voluptuously against his other hip, perhaps the warnings of Renata Dwan and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists should be heeded. As former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev said just two years ago:
“In the modern world, wars must be outlawed, because none of the global problems we are facing can be resolved by war — not poverty, nor the environment, migration, population growth, or shortages of resources.”
In the meantime, the best defense we have is the hope that defiant officers will uphold their promise to disobey a presidential order to deliver a nuclear strike.
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone