See other Religion Articles
Title: Nuclear Christians
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/08/ ... ce-m-vance/nuclear-christians/
Published: Aug 11, 2014
Author: Laurence M. Vance
Post Date: 2014-08-11 08:44:39 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 3435
Comments: 52
In a recent article of mine about Christians apologists for the state, its military, and its wars, I mentioned, for the first time I believe, the term “nuclear Christian.” I would like to elaborate on the meaning of this neologism. Another anniversary of the dropping by the United States of the atomic bombs “Little Boy” and “Fat Man” on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima (August 6, 1945) and Nagasaki (August 9, 1945)—and the incineration of 200,000 civilians—has come and gone. Even as more information comes to light and, thanks to the Internet, becomes more readily available about how unnecessary and evil that action was, it seems as though conservative Christians are more resolute in their defense of it. Not a one of them has probably ever read or even heard of the 1995 book by Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth, the 2001 article by Ralph Raico, “Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” or the just-published article by Barton J. Bernstein on American conservatives in history who criticized the atomic bombing of Japan. But it is not just Christians defending the atomic bombs dropped on Japan that is the problem. Fred Schwarz, founder of the Christian Anticommunism Crusade in 1953, held a rally in New York City in 1962 “to warn the nation that the president needed to adopt a more aggressive stance against the Soviet communists even if it meant risking nuclear war” (Daniel K. Williams, God’s Own Party: The Making of the Christian Right, p. 61). Pat Boone also told the crowd: “I have four lovely young daughters, and I’d rather see them blown to Heaven in a nuclear war than to live in slavery under Communism” (Williams, p. 61). In the late 1960s, many pastors in the Southern Baptist Convention supported the U.S. war effort in Vietnam. According to David E. Settje, Faith and War: How Christians Debated the Cold and Vietnam Wars (pp. 68-69): In 1968, Baptist Press reported on a survey of five hundred ministers in Florida and Louisiana that demonstrated a hawkish stance. Seventy-five percent agreed or strongly agreed that the United States could not afford to lose in Vietnam, with 69 percent backing an escalation of the conflict if current U.S. forces failed to win. Perhaps more telling of their conservative stance and adamant approach to winning the war, 47 percent sanctioned the use of nuclear weapons if essential for victory and 36 percent stated that the war should continue even if it brought about World War III. H. Franklin Paschall, the pastor of First Baptist Church in Nashville, Tennessee, and president of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1967 and 1968, remarked around this time: “It if takes ‘total victory,’ that is total destruction of North Vietnam to bring about negotiations for a just and honorable peace, then I am for it” (Settje, p. 69). In the 1980s, Jerry Falwell, who erroneously believed that the Soviet Union’s nuclear arsenal was twice as large as America’s, “took out advertisements in major newspapers across the nation opposing a nuclear freeze” (Williams, p. 204) Unfortunately, not much has changed. The typical Christian occupying a pew today in a conservative, evangelical, or fundamentalist church believes—because that is just what he has always heard or been told—that the United States had to nuke Japan to save the lives of U.S. soldiers who would die in an invasion of Japan. He believes that the United States had to fight against the communist plan for world domination by any means necessary. He believes that all options must be on the table—including the nuclear one—to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He believes that the United States should continue to spend billions of dollars each year to maintain its arsenal of nuclear weapons. He is a nuclear Christian. Thus, the typical Christian does not differ much from the typical American. The difference is that Christians are supposed to be opposed to unjustified violence, unnecessary bloodshed, and the loss of innocent life—even when it is committed in the service of the state. The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), in an official statement on nuclear arms titled “Nuclear Weapons, 2011,” says that “nuclear weapons, with their capacity for terror as well as for destruction of human life, raise profound spiritual, moral and ethical concerns.” Unfortunately, however, this document goes on to offer policy advice instead of explaining the nature of these concerns. I will not take this approach. Nuclear weapons are immoral. They are immoral because they are purely offensive weapons. They are immoral because they are indiscriminate in the destruction they wrought. And they are immoral because they cannot not target innocent civilians. The works by Alperovitz, Raico, and Bernstein mentioned above are not the only things that Christians have probably never read or even heard. In “War, Peace, and the State,” an often-reprinted article by Murray Rothbard that first appeared in The Standard in 1963, the Christian case against nuclear weapons was admirably made by an agnostic Jew: It has often been maintained, and especially by conservatives, that the development of the horrendous modern weapons of mass murder (nuclear weapons, rockets, germ warfare, etc.) is only a difference of degree rather than kind from the simpler weapons of an earlier era. Of course, one answer to this is that when the degree is the number of human lives, the difference is a very big one. But another answer that the libertarian is particularly equipped to give is that while the bow and arrow and even the rifle can be pinpointed, if the will be there, against actual criminals, modern nuclear weapons cannot. Here is a crucial difference in kind. Of course, the bow and arrow could be used for aggressive purposes, but it could also be pinpointed to use only against aggressors. Nuclear weapons, even “conventional” aerial bombs, cannot be. These weapons are ipso facto engines of indiscriminate mass destruction. (The only exception would be the extremely rare case where a mass of people who were all criminals inhabited a vast geographical area.) We must, therefore, conclude that the use of nuclear or similar weapons, or the threat thereof, is a sin and a crime against humanity for which there can be no justification. This is why the old cliché no longer holds that it is not the arms but the will to use them that is significant in judging matters of war and peace. For it is precisely the characteristic of modern weapons that they cannot be used selectively, cannot be used in a libertarian manner. Therefore, their very existence must be condemned, and nuclear disarmament becomes a good to be pursued for its own sake. And if we will indeed use our strategic intelligence, we will see that such disarmament is not only a good, but the highest political good that we can pursue in the modern world. For just as murder is a more heinous crime against another man than larceny, so mass murder—indeed murder so widespread as to threaten human civilization and human survival itself—is the worst crime that any man could possibly commit. And that crime is now imminent. And the forestalling of massive annihilation is far more important, in truth, than the demunicipalization of garbage disposal, as worthwhile as that may be. Or are libertarians going to wax properly indignant about price control or the income tax, and yet shrug their shoulders at or even positively advocate the ultimate crime of mass murder? If nuclear warfare is totally illegitimate even for individuals defending themselves against criminal assault, how much more so is nuclear or even “conventional” warfare between States! It should also be pointed out that there is no defense against nuclear weapons (the only current “defense” is the threat of mutual annihilation) and, therefore, that the State cannot fulfill any sort of defense function so long as these weapons exist. We have seen throughout our discussion the crucial importance, in any present-day libertarian peace program, of the elimination of modern methods of mass annihilation. These weapons, against which there can be no defense, assure maximum aggression against civilians in any conflict with the clear prospect of the destruction of civilization and even of the human race itself. Highest priority on any libertarian agenda, therefore, must be pressure on all States to agree to general and complete disarmament down to police levels, with particular stress on nuclear disarmament. In short, if we are to use our strategic intelligence, we must conclude that the dismantling of the greatest menace that has ever confronted the life and liberty of the human race is indeed far more important than demunicipalizing the garbage service. Nuclear Christians—rebuke them and educate them just as you would any other Christian apologist for the state, its military, and its wars.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
This not worthy of reading by anyone. This explains who and what Vance stands for.... "Vance is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature, the Grace Evangelical Society, and the International Society of Bible Collectors, and is a policy adviser of the Future of Freedom Foundation and an associated scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute."
So in a nutshell, you're all for the total and complete anhilation of the human race, correct? Don't you think there might be a few who have a different opinion as to whether this would be a desirable outcome? I do not recall saying that. Might you show me where such exists?
Thoroughly discredited, he's been kicked down the road like a rusty soup can.
#2. To: Cynicom (#1)
This not worthy of reading by anyone.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#3. To: FormerLurker (#2)
So in a nutshell, you're all for the total and complete anhilation of the human race, correct?
#4. To: Ada (#0)
Gar Alperovitz
-Alex Kurtagic
#5. To: X-15 (#4)
When alissa zinovievna rosenbaum ayn rand, wrote that the "masses" were but mere lice, with barely a right to life, von Mises was one of the first to laud her for saying what he dared not say. Some of our friends here would do well to read what Martin Luther had to say about jews, past and present in his time.
#6. To: Cynicom (#5)
Martin Luther: www.biblebelievers.org.au/lut her.htm “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.” -Marcus Tullius Cicero
-Alex Kurtagic
#7. To: X-15 (#6)
X, here is the booklet that is from. I keep it handy when ever I find friends here extolling the virtues of world jewry. www.remnantresources.org/...wsAndTheirLies-Luther.pdf Takes bout half hour to read and leaves no uncertainty in anyones minds.
#8. To: Cynicom (#7)
Wonderful find, thank you!
-Alex Kurtagic
#9. To: X-15 (#8)
I keep it in bookmarks, to refresh my memory when people here laud the jews that are destroying us from inside. Rosenbaum was a fraud from day one, selling gullible Americans nonsense that she spewed from her own mind. She called us lice and we overlook that?????? Stand on your own two feet conservatism???? That fraud ended her immoral and booze laced life on social security and medicare. Same as the miserable lice she so detested.
#10. To: Cynicom (#3)
Might you show me where such exists? The article ends with the words, "Nuclear Christians—rebuke them and educate them just as you would any other Christian apologist for the state, its military, and its wars. " Yet you suggest to people reading this post that it's not worthy of their time. I do not recall saying that.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#11. To: Cynicom (#7)
Thanks for the link, Cyni. Very enlightening.
#12. To: FormerLurker (#10)
Show me where that exists. I made a direct statement, it is not worthy of anyones time, not a suggestion. Anyone that was there at the time might well have a differing opinion from those looking at it long years after the fact. So in a nutshell, you're all for the total and complete anhilation of the human race, correct?
#13. To: Obnoxicated (#11)
What Luther wrote 500 years ago is so relevant today that it is startling. I wish everyone here would read and digest Luthers words.
#14. To: Cynicom (#12)
It's obvious that you didn't read past the first few lines of the article. The majority deals with the zeal that so-called christians have for nuclear war against some imagined foe, such as the USSR, or now against Russia. Basically ANYONE whom the powers that be portray as an "enemy" is worthy of nuclear anhilation, in their minds, even though they supposedly worship the "Prince of Peace" and claim to follow in His footsteps. So get past the first paragraph or so and you might understand why I posted the words I did.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#15. To: Ada (#0)
Much needed article. Great find -- bravo! The Jews made Luther recant from his book, but it doesn't change an iota of the truth in it; I suspect he only did it to save himself (all ditto Henry Ford and lots of people). The trouble I have getting a rise out of even liberal friends for the cause of peace is incredible. Even those that were hippie peaceniks 40 years ago can't be bothered. Well, I say that, but come to think of it, they were just hippies going along with the crowd -- few actually strongly, advisedly for peace. "Ayn Rand" was a bizarre character. She hated communism only because it dispossessed her immediate family as a girl and not, I think, based on any great over-arching principle. Her personal morals are more naked pragmatism (making it up and philosophizing it as you go along). I hope Fred Schwartz and Pat Boone didn't mean those statements as it may appear. Of course, the best way to toughen up on the USSR was never tried -- refusing to support it financially through trade or any other way and teaching the public the real nature of communism -- thinly veiled Jewish supremacism. The McCarthy hearings were during the presidency of D.D. Eisenhower, one of the most notorious hatchet-men the supremacists ever had.
#16. To: Cynicom (#1)
I am fully aware that Vance calls himself "Evangelical". I have read his columns for years in LRC and elsewhere. To that I can confidently say that his is my favorite "Evangelical" Christian. If more Christians thought the same way as Laurence Vance, the religion would have a lot more appeal. Not enough Christians are as insightful as Vance. To that I can only praise him as an individual writer, regardless of what label he wears or who he associates with. If you bothered to read his stuff more you would see how often he expresses his disgust towards his fellow Christians, disgust towards the militarization of the church (flags and military recruitment are blasphemy). He is against the drug war and pretty much every other form of government intrusion/intervention you can think of. I always look forward to reading Vance's writings in LRC.
John Howard says: There are 4 schools of economics:
Marxism: steal everything
Keynesianism: steal by counterfeiting whenever needed
Chicago school (Milton Friedman): steal by counterfeiting at a steady, predictable rate
Austrians: don't steal
Democrats don't mind war as long as they can have big government. Republicans don't mind big government as long as they can have war.
'Wiped off the Map' – The Rumor of the Century
#17. To: FormerLurker (#14)
Beg to differ, read it all and found it wanting. Made that rather clear. There are no "imagined foes". They are real, they are here with us and they wish us harm. Evil men throughout history have desired to rule first the known world, then later the entire world. They may come and go but the lust to prevail never leaves. That is why history is replete with constant conflicts, this dynamic will never change. Believing that if we are of good will, lay down our arms, love everyone, that the rest of the world will do the same is naive. A country stands only via the force of arms, either theirs or those of someone else. It's obvious that you didn't read past the first few lines of the article. The majority deals with the zeal that so-called christians have for nuclear war against some imagined foe, such as the USSR, or now against Russia.
#18. To: PnbC (#16)
That is by Vance. Would we be having this discussion if we had used the A-bomb on Berlin? Both Germany and Japan were hard at work trying to finalize a working A bomb. Is there anyone here that honestly believes that they would not have been overjoyed to have dropped one on New York or San Francisco? Having spent some time in Japan after WWII, I never met any Japanese that brought up the subject of "innocent civilians". In reality there is no such thing. We here are all guilty of paying our taxes, voting, supporting a government that sends men all over the world to kill people, for whatever reason. It is called aiding and abetting. Sometimes it is difficult to deem oneself as innocent. Nuclear weapons are immoral. They are immoral because they are purely offensive weapons. They are immoral because they are indiscriminate in the destruction they wrought. And they are immoral because they cannot not target innocent civilians.
#19. To: Cynicom (#18)
By your reasoning, the victims of the World Trade Center deserved to die because they were aiding and abetting their imperialistic government (discounting any "inside job" arguments). It is exactly the same reasoning. And yes, at least some of us would be having this discussion if the US had nuked Berlin. The American people have become so accepting of their own government's evil that it only serves to humanize the Germans of the last century.
John Howard says: There are 4 schools of economics:
Marxism: steal everything
Keynesianism: steal by counterfeiting whenever needed
Chicago school (Milton Friedman): steal by counterfeiting at a steady, predictable rate
Austrians: don't steal
Democrats don't mind war as long as they can have big government. Republicans don't mind big government as long as they can have war.
'Wiped off the Map' – The Rumor of the Century
#20. To: Cynicom (#17) (Edited)
There are no "imagined foes". They are real, they are here with us and they wish us harm. There are MANUFACTURED foes, there are IMAGINED foes, and then there are the REAL foes. MANUFACTURED FOE EXAMPLES: IMAGINED FOE EXAMPLES: REAL FOE EXAMPLES: The IMAGINARY FOES, while taking no hostile act against us, are being demonized as threats to our existance and way of life. The MANUFACTURED FOES, after prodding, manipulation, and acts of war such as economic sanctions, were involved in hostile actions with us and our allies over the course of time. There are MANY unnamed REAL FOES, but let's just say western governments fall more in line with those traits than do the imagined or manufactured foes. Evil men throughout history have desired to rule first the known world, then later the entire world. They may come and go but the lust to prevail never leaves. Thing is, OUR country is being led by those evil men, provoking and instigating wars across the planet out of sheer greed and "lust to prevail" over others.. That is why history is replete with constant conflicts, this dynamic will never change. Believing that if we are of good will, lay down our arms, love everyone, that the rest of the world will do the same is naive. We have no business lecturing other countries when we ourselves commit unprovoked acts of war, torture and murder detainees, and impose police state tyranny on our own population. A country stands only via the force of arms, either theirs or those of someone else. The world stands only by the collective restraint against the use of nuclear weapons, yet Obama and gang are committing acts of war against a nuclear power as we speak. That restraint can only last so long.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#21. To: FormerLurker (#20)
Lets take a look at REAL ones... The one country that has been our enemy since 1918, and all of my life is Russia. Others come and go, friends today, enemies tomorrow, but not Russia. That is near 100 years, fairly well consistent. In that 100 years, Hitler has been the only one to out smart and out wit them with evil. Who trained Hitlers army and air force, where were they trained for years???????????
#22. To: Cynicom (#21)
That Russia no longer exists, in fact it wasn't called Russia, it was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or USSR for short. On that same note, Ukraine was ALSO part of the USSR. Do you hate Ukrainians too? That is near 100 years, fairly well consistent. In that 100 years, Hitler has been the only one to out smart and out wit them with evil. Uh huh. I guess you think Hitler defeated Stalin, eh? Regardless, the communist regime known as the Soviet Union was dissolved two decades ago, and the new generation of Russians were born into a free democracy and have never known communist rule. Nor have this last generation of Russians ever partaken in wars of conquest. NONE of the living generations here in the US can say the same thing. The one country that has been our enemy since 1918, and all of my life is Russia.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#23. To: Cynicom (#21)
What it comes to Cyni is this. Are you wanting and willing to eradicate human life on this planet due to your old grudge against a nation which ceased to exist 23 years ago? Do you cheer Obama and his henchmen each time they commit another unprovoked hostile act against the Russian Federation, with the ultimate goal of provoking it to respond with force? Do you consider yourself a "good christian"?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#24. To: FormerLurker (#23)
The "you" segments are telling and tiresome.
#25. To: Ada (#0)
many folk across the spectrum would nuke d.c. or london or brussels or tel aviv or what have you at one time or another imo.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#26. To: FormerLurker (#20)
well stated.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#27. To: All (#26)
wish i had a nuke to detonate during a bberg private family vacation. who's with me ?!
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#28. To: Rotara (#25)
I've long thought that all the bombs, missiles, rockets and other armament should be directed to the capitals/capitols of whatever nation was to be brought down. Spare the innocent citizens, and kill all the leaders asap. We would have no more of these eternal, never-ending wars. Give the civilians a break for a change.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#29. To: All (#25)
the samson option makes perfect sense to many people, zios first.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#30. To: Cynicom (#24)
We're not discussing a concept here, we're discussing YOUR view of what the situation is. YOU have some old hatred of a former nation, I don't. I don't LIKE what that former nation did, then again nor do a whole LOT of Russians (and their parents, grandparents, etc.) who suffered under the various purges and such. But YOU Cyni are apparently willing to launch missiles at Moscow right this moment, for God knows what reason. Apparently, people such as you fail to consider what would happen to US if our country launched its missiles at Russia in an attempt to massacre 146 million people, just because YOU (and people LIKE you) don't like them for what their former leaders did 50 or more years ago. THEY also have nuclear missiles Cyni, sub launched, land based, and air dropped. We would ALL die in a war against Russia. Is that not a concern of yours? Funny thing is, just the other day some elderly woman stuck up a conversation with me, and we were talking about how the US government isn't fullfilling its duty to protect our nation against invasion. I brought up the subject that not only is our government not fullfilling its duty in protecting us against invasion, but that they're instigating wars in nations that have nothing to do with us, the last example being the mess in the Ukraine that we created by overthrowing the elected government there. The knee jerk reaction from her was "oh, Putin is a dangerous man who must be stopped", and "you need to read up on World War II". Well I'll tell you what. My father fought under George Patton, served in North Africa, Italy, France, Belgium, and Germany, and was in the invasion of Anzio. Maybe she thought I was younger, who knows. As far as Putin being a dangerous man, what has he done to merit this label? He must be stopped from doing WHAT exactly? Western media have brainwashed susceptable folks (such as senior citizens who generally believe everything they see on CNN/Fox/ABC/NBC/CBS, etc.) to believe that Putin is a monster who is waging wars across Europe to reform the Soviet Empire. Yet it is not Putin, but Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush/(not so much Reagan, Carter, or Ford)/Nixon, and of course, LBJ, who have waged wars of aggression across the planet for the past 50 years. It becomes clear once you stop thinking that our government is pure as snow, and that the news media are virtuous and exist to inform the public of what they need to know. The "you" segments are telling and tiresome.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#31. To: FormerLurker (#30)
Unwilling to deal in YOUS discussions. That is a childish game. Ready to view anything of substance.
#32. To: Rotara (#27)
I want the State of the Union Address nuked !!!
"This place called earth is hell (though it could be heaven).” Those that haven't noticed are without a soul to be redeemed.
noone222
#33. To: noone222 (#32)
Once a year when the slate could be cleaned totally.
#34. To: Lod (#28)
that is exactly my point ! i am with you and T.Jeff on this.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#35. To: Cynicom (#33)
Yes ! Screw Voting them out. Once a year when the slate could be cleaned totally.
"This place called earth is hell (though it could be heaven).” Those that haven't noticed are without a soul to be redeemed.
noone222
#36. To: noone222 (#32)
i resemble that remark !
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#37. To: Cynicom (#31)
Again Cyni, we're not discussing concepts here, we're discussing YOUR view of those concepts. We are not debating on the merits of war, since there IS no merit of war in reality. I am trying to understand why YOU have this irrational hatred against the people of Russia, and why you wish to destroy them, along with the rest of us on planet earth. You see, this all started when you dismissed the article as not worthy of people's time to read. I understood that to mean you condoned the concept of irrational hatred towards those our "leaders" have demonized, and that you support those who cheer for war against those who have not harmed us, neglecting the fact that war against a nuclear power would result in total anhilation of human life on this planet. And oh yeah, I'm wondering if you're a christian or not, yet have no qualms with the murder and destruction of all life on earth. Because this isn't all about YOU Cyni. There are MANY who think like you, and I'm just trying to understand WHY you think the way you do. Unwilling to deal in YOUS discussions. That is a childish game. Ready to view anything of substance.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#38. To: Lod (#28)
Spare the innocent citizens, and kill all the leaders asap. Thing is, the PEOPLE of the nation who are attacked would fight the attacker, and the PEOPLE of the nation doing the attacking would generally follow the lead of their leaders and fight the "enemy", if the propaganda is believable enough, or in an effort to survive a retaliatory strike. It's a nice idea, but unfortunately, in this day and age civilian populations ARE strategic targets. It's always been that way actually, except now the entire world population could be wiped out in an actual nuclear war. I've long thought that all the bombs, missiles, rockets and other armament should be directed to the capitals/capitols of whatever nation was to be brought down.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#39. To: Rotara (#36)
No doubt in my mind bro ! i resemble that remark !
"This place called earth is hell (though it could be heaven).” Those that haven't noticed are without a soul to be redeemed.
noone222
#40. To: FormerLurker (#38)
With a very, very few exceptions, I completely disagree. Most peoples would like to live their lives in peace and harmony without the meddling, warsome intervention of their rulers. Let them all die and go away. Thing is, the PEOPLE of the nation who are attacked would fight the attacker,...
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#41. To: Ada, 4, abraxas, randge (#0)
Thoughtful if flawed article. ABM (anti-ballistic missile systems) are feasible and should be implemented to protect target populations and strategic assets. But banning nuclear weapons themselves is a little like banning guns in Chicago. People can still be shot, somehow. The problem as I see it: nuclear powers are being corrupted by their own cultural weaknesses such as religion (as illustrated well in this article) and commerce, and the power of the government. I don't trust Obama with the nuclear football. I didn't trust Bush with it. And so on. How does the second amendment apply when the federal government has super weapons of such a massive destructive and psychological nature? The balance of power between the citizens and the government is tilted in favor of government by nuclear weapons. Add continuity of government programs and the second amendment begins to look obsolete. (No, I'm not saying it is!) Liberty is lost by degrees under a nuclear government. The U.S. and Russian governments have complete power over life and death on the entire planet. They can hold their citizens in a state of awe and terror just by saying "do what we say or else our protection of your lives will fail." They can make radical reforms seem impossible with this fear. I think it's more than a coincidence that the Civil Rights and Great Society programs were implemented in the US after we were armed with nuclear weapons and after winning the optional WWI and WWII conflicts. It should also be pointed out that there is no defense against nuclear weapons (the only current “defense” is the threat of mutual annihilation) and, therefore, that the State cannot fulfill any sort of defense function so long as these weapons exist.
.
.
.
Comments (42 - 52) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest