Below is article The Chosen Nukes regarding the furore about the nuke test in N 
Korea while the huge nuclear arsenal in Israel (supposedly the Jews are The 
Chosen People) is never mentioned. 
 
In the English media, the rulers of N Korea are consistently portrayed as 
madmen. 
Shamir's article mentions how during the Korean War more bombs wer dropped on 
Korea than on Germany during WWII - entirely flattening the country "every 
single standing man-made structure had ...been destroyed"
 
Note also that Shamir explicitly says that the S Korea has been a US colony 
since the Korean War  suspect also Japan and even Germany are still colonies - 
the UK has 20,000 troops in Germany and the US 68,000!! Almost 90,000 troops 
for what?
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4094818.stm#germany
Although much smaller than its deployment in Germany at the height of the Cold 
War, the more than 20,000 UK troops there represent the largest overseas 
contingent by far.    
 
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_US_troops_are_stationed_in_Germany
There are approximately 68,000 US Troops stationed in Germany. 
 
http://www.slate.com/id/2105295/
 The U.S. Pacific Command keeps about 37,500 troops in South Korea and 47,000 
troops in Japan (including Okinawa). 
 
Hmm.....
 

http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Chosen_Nukes.htm
 





Chosen Nukes 




By Israel Adam Shamir – May 29, 2009 
Fry and Laurie (or Laurel and Hardy) could do it nicely: 

- The Chosen have got nukes. They've gone nuclear! 
- Well, is that news? Israel has had hundreds of nuclear bombs for some twenty 
years, according to Vanunu, but only antisemites ever mention it. 
- Sorry, I did not mean the Chosen People, I mean the People of the Chosen, and 
“Chosen” is the Korean name for North Korea. 
- The Chosen? How dare they challenge the international community! Where do 
these Chosen men get off thinking that they are chosen? 

The successful underground nuclear test in North Korea unleashed a huge wave – 
a wave of hypocrisy, that is. The state with by far the largest nuclear arsenal 
in the world, the country that has already used A-bombs against civilians, the 
US, expressed its outrage. U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said, “The United States 
thinks that this is a grave violation of international law and a threat to 
regional and international peace and security and therefore the United States 
will seek a strong resolution with strong measures.” According to Rice, it is 
not invasion, it is not occupation, it is not aggression, but rather it is 
arming oneself against a very probable invasion, aggression and occupation that 
violates international law. And she did not remind us of a well-forgotten fact: 
for many years it was North Korea that called for turning the whole of Korean 
peninsula into nuclear-weapons-free zone, and it was the US that insisted on 
having its nukes on
 North Korea’s doorstep. 

North Korea, or the Chosen in its own language, is a country of indomitable men 
and women. They are strong, independent and hard-working. They shake hands with 
an iron grip. Their names are short, their cabbage is fiery, their national 
pride knows no limits – and for good reason: they fought against the US in its 
prime, and survived the worst onslaught ever engineered by Man. Think Dresden, 
multiply by Gaza and add Iraq to equal Korea in the 1950s. The US and its 
satellites dropped more bombs on this small mountainous country than they had 
dropped on Germany. General Douglas Macarthur wanted to nuke them, but Harry 
Truman stopped him: there were no objects worth nuking, for every single 
standing man-made structure had already been destroyed. The Korean War was mass 
murder writ large: millions of Koreans were killed, burned by napalm, shot and 
executed by the Americans and their allies. Any Korean village's death rate 
could compete with that of
 Auschwitz. 

The Koreans survived and rebuilt their country. But the massive bombing took a 
heavy toll on the people’s psyche. A nation will never be the same after 
saturation bombing, any more than will an individual who has been gang raped. 
Usually they break down into total submission for a generation (that is why 
gang rape is the prisoners’ way to assume control over a disobedient inmate), 
so did Serbs, so did Germans, so did the Japanese after being sodomised by US 
bombs. The Koreans’ own post-traumatic syndrome consisted of withdrawal, 
extreme self-reliance and endless fear of another attack. This fear was 
well-grounded in reality: US troops and bases still occupy the south of the 
Korean peninsula. South Korea is still as far from independence as it was 
before the WWII, only the US has replaced Japan as the colonising power. 

More importantly, the US has carried out relentless sanctions warfare against 
unvanquished, independent Korea. This well-developed strategy of blockade was 
utilised with great success against Iraq and Cuba, and now Americans plan to 
use it against Iran. Noam Chomsky correctly defined the US strategy: never give 
up; keep destroying countries which do not submit by all means possible 
including economic warfare. Whoever does not surrender should be pushed back 
into the Stone Age. 

Korea was willing to dismantle its nuclear facilities, provided the US would 
cease its economic warfare. They signed an agreement, closed down the reactor, 
but the US reneged on the agreement and turned up its hostilities. America, as 
ruled by its “Chicago boys,” is neo-liberal to the bone and cannot tolerate a 
socialist state. Korea would not let American companies take over its economy, 
and that is why the US and its satellites kept impounding Korean bank accounts 
and interfering with its trade. The imperial media were kept busy churning out 
dreadful stories (actually, regurgitated anti-Communist urban legends from 
McCarthy’s days) about starving Koreans under commies’ yoke. They were not 
going to allow Korea to live its own, socialist way. 

When the people of South Korea began to express their wish to unite with the 
independent North, South Korea was robbed by the Mammonites who engineered the 
great Tiger crisis of 1997. Everything you are experiencing now during the 2009 
crisis the South Koreans went through twelve years ago. Their great economy was 
broken to pieces and bought for peanuts by the trans-nationals. All their 
accumulated labour of many years was snatched by George Soros et al. At the 
same time, the American offensive against independent Korea was intensified. 

President GW Bush (or his speechwriter David Frum) designated Korea, next to 
Iraq and Iran, to be part of the Axis of Evil. In this situation, the Koreans 
were right to develop the ultimate weapon of defence. And this holds equally 
true for Iran today. A Korean and Iranian nuclear deterrent would be a 
defensive shield for these independent countries. 

Korea did not take it lying down. This rather small and far away country, 
enfeebled by blockade and sanctions, contributes more than its fair share to 
the most important battle over Palestine. The Koreans, who suffered so much 
from the American-imposed siege, do help besieged Gaza and other neighbours of 
the Jewish state to acquire weapons. Not necessarily nukes – even conventional 
arms interfere with the total freedom of Israelis to kill Palestinians and to 
fly over Beirut and Damascus. 

Using the nuclear issue as a pretext, the pro-Israel Lobby pushed for the 
decision to search all Korean shipping. They also orchestrated a vast public 
campaign in the mass media, uniting anti-Communists and nuke-fearing pacifists 
against socialist Korea. We are supposed to be afraid of Korean A-bombs and 
call upon Obama and Netanyahu to disarm the rebels. 

God knows I am a peaceful man, but I'm not a pacifist. Weapons are needed to 
defend people from Israeli-American state terrorism. A so-called pacifist who 
supports American and Israeli attempts to maintain their monopoly on nuclear 
arms is, in my book, just another supporter of the Judeo-American war machine. 
If he is an honest man, let him call for the disarmament of the Chosen Peoples 
of Israel and America, and postpone dealing with the Chosen people of Korea and 
the Iranians until after Dimona is dismantled and American nukes are turned 
into ploughshares. 

The struggle for Korean nuclear independence is extremely relevant for the 
Middle East, and first of all, for the Iranian nuclear project. It is true that 
Iran is not seeking military application for its nuclear industry, being 
perfectly content with peaceful energy. However, the Judeo-American interests 
want to turn North Korea into an example for Iran. They wish to do something 
nasty to not-too-relevant Korea so that Iran will fall in line. 

Obama could settle with Korea at the quite reasonable price of stopping the 
interference with its life. Sign a peace treaty, stop the threats, remove the 
sanctions, terminate the campaign of hate. The Koreans would pay for 
normalisation of their relationship with the US by giving up their nuclear 
facilities. But that would neither frighten nor seduce Iran. So Obama may 
choose a violent action including a naval blockade, so that a suitably 
impressed Iran will close down its reactors. 

This would be a pity. A pity for Koreans who deserve, like everybody else, to 
live their lives the way they like. A pity for Korea’s enemies, for the Koreans 
are not easy to defeat. And a pity for the Middle East which badly needs the 
deterring presence of a nuclear-capable Iran. 

The Israeli media published a poll claiming that “some 23 percent of Israelis 
would consider leaving the country if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon”. The idea 
is to push the US and Europe into a frenzy of anti-Iranian action, for no 
country would like to absorb two million Israeli refugees. This is the secret 
Doomsday weapon of Zionist propaganda: if pushed hard, we’ll just go back to 
your countries and you are not going to like it. However, the small print of 
the survey shows that this fear of Iran is spread mainly among suggestible 
Israelis, 39 percent of women as opposed to 22 percent of men – they swallowed 
their government's propaganda -- hook, line and sinker. 

Paradoxically for us Israelis, nuclear Iran represents hope for peace, not a 
threat to it. Our greatest danger lies in the aggressive tendency of our 
generals and politicians. They have already caused so many unneeded wars by 
attacking Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinians. There is need for a counterbalance, 
for a great and powerful state that would keep our [Israeli] hawks in check. 
Since Iraq was subdued by the US army and Egypt by political means, Israeli 
generals have gone to war every two years. Only a nuclear Iran is likely to 
check Israeli warmongers and force Israel to proceed with peace process. 

No sane Israeli expert, not even an extreme hawk, believes that a nuclear Iran 
would endanger or threaten Israel. Israel is too powerful, perfectly capable of 
delivering a deadly second strike. But this mind-boggling freedom of action the 
Israeli military enjoys would be gone, and that would be a good thing. 

The balance of fear, or MAD (mutual assured destruction) is still the only way 
to deal with the Israeli-American threat. This was the reason for the martyrdom 
of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg; by helping the USSR to build their nuclear bomb 
they saved uncounted millions from horrible death, even at the price of their 
own life. 


The Voice of Saruman
It is extremely worrisome that Russia and China, two friends of independent 
Korea, did not throw the American-sponsored resolution right out the high 
window of the Security Council. True, they refused the Americans’ call for 
sanctions, but this is not enough. They should not agree with any sort of 
condemnation of an independent country acting within its own legitimate rights. 
Russia and China fought on the side of Pyongyang against the US, and they 
should not betray their war-tried ally, and with it their own dead soldiers of 
the People’s Liberation Army and the fallen pilots of the Russian Air Force. 

Chinese leaders may remember Mao’s decision to go nuclear. When China exploded 
its first atom bomb, he declared: 

“This is a major achievement of the Chinese people in their struggle to 
strengthen their national defence and oppose the U.S. imperialist policy of 
nuclear blackmail and nuclear threats. To defend oneself is the inalienable 
right of every sovereign state. To safeguard world peace is the common task of 
all peace-loving countries. China cannot remain idle in the face of the 
ever-increasing nuclear threats from the United States. China is conducting 
nuclear tests and developing nuclear weapons under compulsion. 

The Chinese Government has consistently advocated the complete prohibition and 
thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. If this had been achieved, China need 
not have developed nuclear weapons. But our proposal has met with stubborn 
resistance from the U.S. The nuclear tests ban treaty of 1963 by the United 
States, Britain and the Soviet Union was an attempt to consolidate the nuclear 
monopoly of the three nuclear powers and tie the hands of all peace-loving 
countries, and that it had increased, and not decreased, the nuclear threat of 
U.S. imperialism against the people of China and of the whole world. . . .By 
developing nuclear weapons, China's aim is to break the nuclear monopoly of the 
nuclear powers and to eliminate nuclear weapons.” 

Every word in this wonderful, ringing declaration is as right today as it was 
then. Just put ‘Korea’ or ‘Iran’ in place of ‘China’, and you’ll agree that 
Korea and Iran “cannot remain idle in the face of the ever increasing nuclear 
threats from the United States”. Korea and Iran are “conducting nuclear tests 
and developing nuclear weapons under compulsion”. If and when President Obama 
eliminates American and Israeli arsenals, Korea and Iran’s turn will surely 
come. 

Russia’s leaders Medvedev and Putin should apply their own doctrine of a 
multipolar world to the case of Korea. If they sincerely dispute the US 
doctrine of full spectrum dominance and believe in the sovereignty of every 
state, they should accept the sovereign right of Koreans to self-defence and 
deterrence. Nuclear monopoly is ethically wrong, for it establishes two tiers 
of states: these entitled to a nuclear shield and those deemed unworthy of it. 

They should reject the ploy of “joint responsibility” that the Russians have 
repeatedly fallen for. There is no such thing as “joint responsibility” or 
“joint security” between the Empire and the rebels. Gorbachev was a great adept 
of joint responsibility and security, and he ruled long enough to see his 
Russia skinned by creditors and surrounded by NATO bases. Putin was taken in by 
this ploy in 2001, when he supported George W. Bush’s War on Terror, 
facilitated his conquest of Afghanistan, and willingly dismantled two important 
naval bases in Cuba and Vietnam. Later he learned that the US had exploited his 
credulity to move its own bases forward and undermine Russia’s standing in her 
own backyard. 

Russia and America are interlocked in a zero-sum game, and that is why America 
promotes the anti-Russian policies of Georgia and the Ukraine, and tries to 
isolate Russia in the great pipeline competition. Russian leaders should 
recognise this sad fact of life and give more support to Iran and Korea. They 
should kick their oh-so-human desire to hobnob with the Western leaders. This 
is a constant problem of people’s representatives: trade union leaders discover 
that they do enjoy sumptuous lunches with factory owners more than hanging out 
with factory hands. Socialist leaders are prone to accept the cajoling of 
Western leaders and to sign on the dotted line against the best interest of 
their people. 

Gorbachev has sold his country down the river for the sheer pleasure of being 
embraced by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Anwar as-Sadat would give up 
Arab interests for a prime-time interview with Barbara Walters. In the very 
beginning of his rule, Vladimir Putin was for a while taken in by bonhommerie 
of his G8 mates, fellow rulers and shepherds of men. 

They listened to the voice of Saruman. In the Lord of the Rings, the evil 
sorcerer Saruman tries to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, and he 
proposes to Gandalf, the leader of the good guys, a “joint responsibility” 
proposal in front of his friends and foot soldiers: 

“Our friendship would profit us both alike. Much we could still accomplish 
together, to heal the disorders of the world. Let us understand one another, 
and dismiss from thought these lesser folk! Let them wait on our decisions! For 
the common good I am willing to redress the past, and to receive you. Will you 
not consult with me? Will you not come up?” 

The good guys got scared. They felt like “stupid servants overhearing the 
elusive discourse of their elders, and wondering how it would affect their lot. 
It was inevitable that Gandalf and Saruman should make alliance. Gandalf would 
ascend into the tower, and they would be left outside, dismissed to await the 
allotted work or punishment. Even in the mind of Théoden the thought took 
shape, like a shadow of doubt, “He will betray us; he will go, we shall be 
lost.” 

Then Gandalf laughed. The fantasy vanished like a puff of smoke.” 

This is the right reply to the American offers of “joint responsibility”. 
Russia and China are the leaders of the free world, the world free from 
American bases and troops, free from Israeli diktat, free from consumerist 
mania, free from neo-liberal dogma. They are responsible for the Freedom of 
Man, and they should laugh off every suggestion about what they will do 
together with the great oppressors. 

We would all love to see President Obama taking his soldiers and hardware back 
home from Iraq and Afghanistan, from Italy and Germany, from Japan and South 
Korea, and turning the US into a friendly giant. This still can happen: this 
week, his Pentagon issued a medal for courage to an American soldier who 
survived the Israeli attack on USS Liberty in June 1967, 42 years after this 
atrocity was first hidden from the public. This could herald a new turn in 
American politics and the end of Zionist ascendancy. If and when that happens 
will be the time for greater cooperation between countries. But meanwhile, it 
is freedom that is at stake, and North Korea is the place to defend it. 

Reply via email to