---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 00:51:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: GOD, BUSH AND THE BOMB

GOD, BUSH AND THE BOMB

by Paul Cantor
submitted to portside by the author

"Thank God for the atom bomb," wrote William Manchester
in a memoir recounting his service as a marine during
World War II.

Sixty years ago, on August 6 and August 9, 1945, atom
bombs killed over 100,000 people and destroyed the
Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Consequently, according to the widely held view echoed
by Manchester, they forced Japan to surrender on August
14 and thereby obviated the need for an invasion that
would have cost even more lives. The United States
Strategic Bombing Survey, on the other hand, concluded
that "even without the atomic bombing attacks, air
supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient
pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and
obviate the need for invasion."

Even given the Survey?s conclusion, however, many think
we should still "thank God for the atom bomb." The
bomb, they reason, made it clear there would be no
victors in a nuclear confrontation. Consequently there
has never been a World War III.

This is an argument favored by the neo conservatives in
the Bush administration. It implies that by maintaining
its preeminent nuclear arsenal the United States
prevents other nuclear nations from attacking it or its
allies. But if that is the case then there is no need
to worry about nuclear proliferation and there was no
need to attack Iraq. Indeed, the fact that Bush invaded
Iraq under his "preemptive war" doctrine indicates that
either he doesn't really believe that simply
maintaining the world?s preeminent nuclear arsenal is
enough to keep the peace or that he lied about the real
reason for the invasion.

The truth, of course, is that the bomb does not keep
the peace. Rather in the sixty years since Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in which we have been steadily upgrading
our nuclear arsenal we have been involved in major wars
in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf and Iraq.
Furthermore, during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis we
almost went to war with the Soviet Union.

Nor can it be said that our preeminent nuclear arsenal
has made us safer. Rather it has led other nations to
intensify their efforts to obtain or upgrade their own
nuclear arsenals while doing nothing to discourage
terrorist attacks against us.

What then should we do? There are four steps we should
take immediately to begin to eliminate the threat of a
nuclear confrontation. First, we should apologize for
dropping the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As a
nation we need to recognize that together these two
acts were among the greatest atrocities of the 20th
century.  Unfortunately we tend to think we occupy the
moral high ground even though, as never before in our
history, the rest of the world doesn't see it that way.
Today we have Abu Gharib to add to the slaughter of
Indians, slavery, the firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo,
and the overthrow of democratic regimes in Chile,
Guatemala, and Iran as a stain on our past.

Second, we should pull out of Iraq and renounce our
unilateral preemptive war policy.  Third, we should
pledge not to devote more resources to upgrading our
nuclear arsenal with bunker busting bombs and other
more devastating weapons. Fourth we should announce our
intention to work through the United Nations to bring
all nuclear weapons under international control and
then begin to eliminate them.

It is only by taking steps such as these that we can
gain credibility as a nation committed to pursuing
peace and justice in the world rather than our own
selfish interests. But of course none of these steps
will be taken under the current administration.
Therefore, it is not too soon to begin thinking about a
change in leadership.

---------

Paul Cantor is a professor of economics and a human
rights activist who lives in Norwalk, Connecticut.

_______________________________________________________

portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a news,
discussion and debate service of the Committees of
Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It aims to
provide varied material of interest to people on the
left.

For answers to frequently asked questions:
<http://www.portside.org/faq>

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change settings:
<http://lists.portside.org/mailman/listinfo/portside>

To submit material, paste into an email and send to:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (postings are moderated)

For assistance with your account:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To search the portside archive:
<http://people-link5.inch.com/pipermail/portside/>

Reply via email to