Monday, June 23, 2008

Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

The most dangerous and lasting tool of war is that of the Nuclear variety. Not only are nuclear weapons the most destructive, intended for nothing more than mass casualty, but their blast results in radiation fallout leaving areas unlivable for years, and spreading sickness across the globe.

So why would any country in the world tolerate the current proliferation of this technology?

The simple answer is that no country should tolerate nuclear technology development.

The Cold war saw bomb tests that pushed the limits of what the world could survive, and eventually, with the detonation of the Soviet Union's Tsar Bomb (50 MT detonation Thermonuclear Blast) the world put it's breaks on for "bigger" and began thinking "quantity". This nuclear stockpile was enough for each of the super-powers to destroy the world many times over. But what lesson did we learn from this nuclear contest?

One would assume that the lessons learned were those of awe of the raw power, humility in that power, and to be humble in our reaches to destroy our enemy... as there comes a point where the consequences of your technology will ultimately also destroy you (and everyone else). This ultimate destruction led the USSR and the US into the "mutually ensured destruction" mentality, which saved our two nations from moving forward with nuclear war...

But what about states that have no ill will towards their own destruction, or the death of their own people? What about states that choose to use these weapons as tools of offense against their neighbors?

The answer by any sane individual should be that this technology should be thwarted at all costs!

This is the very reality that we, as a group of logical and rational individuals, are facing in Syria and Iran... countries with an agenda of murder based on religion, in search of a technology that kills indiscriminately, en masse.

Israel, the target of Iran's nuclear weapon's program, is preparing to defend itself against the imminent threat of an Iranian Nuclear Program... and I completely support Israel's right to strike Iranian Nuclear Compounds.

In the lead-up to World War Two, Adolf Hitler made his intentions very clear... the annihilation of the Jewish population from the face of the earth. He stated this every time he spoke, and eventually had the power to begin his war of murder against innocent civilians. Similarly, Iranian leaders are daily calling for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel, and the destruction of Judaism in the world... while subsequently developing nuclear technologies. They have stated their purpose, we all know their tool of choice... and it is our responsibility to never have to ask the question: "Why didn't someone do something?"

Iran is a state undeserving of political courtship. They are dangerous... to Israel, to the US, to their neighbors, and to the innocent citizens of that country who have no power over their insane leaders. The structure of that state needs to be re-thought, and the power needs to be put back into the hands of the educated and rational... not the militaristic religious leaders in power now.

But what consequences are there to Israel attacking Iran?

The leader of the AIEA claimed that he would step down because the Middle East would turn into a fireball. He claims that there is no clear and present danger, yet, and therefore no attack is necessary.

Israel attacked Iraq in the early 80's for the same reasons - destroying their nuclear weapons facilities. Iran has learned from the attack on Iraq, building their facilities further underground and spread throughout their country, so a more coordinated effort would need to take place to ensure the destruction of their program... Israel would have to strike many locations throughout Iran, giving resemblance to a full scale invasion... a move that would unite the Iranian people behind moving into emergency measures and retaliating against Iraq and Israel (Iraq because the US is there). Their attacks would come in the form of hundreds of suicide attacks, civil unrest, and general mayhem...

Suppose, however, that the attack included one on the leaders of Iran as well? The destruction of the leadership would isolate the chaos to Iran, with the occasional attack of US and Israeli interests (no more than usual, I would think)... and the country of Iran may be one step closer to returning to a peaceful country led by logic and wisdom.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of every human to ensure that nuclear technology is no longer allowed to be developed by countries around the world. Instead, I propose using the money to fund alternative sources of energy, such as solar or wind... A country could more easily stimulate their own economy by ensuring technical jobs, cleaner energy, and a more peaceful existence.

Of course... unless that is not their goal?


  1. One thing Iraq has made obvious: removing a crazy dictator does not mean a rational government will spring up in his place.

    Nice post, though, generally. I hope your baby is doing well.

  2. Jessi - Yeah... that segment is a little utopian. But Iran has a history of peace, prior to the 1979 revolution. I believe that as a whole, Iran is a decent country... just crazy leaders hell bent on forcing the "end of times" scenarios.

    I am also researching another post on the building of the thruid temple, and how this also plays into the "end times" that we are finding ourselves in.