Do nations have the right to self-defense? Is there any justification for a double standard? Shall we disarm all nations or none? Is the US the most dangerous of all, being the only country to use a nuclear weapon by dropping 2 Atomic Bombs killing 300,000 men, women, and children? What are your thoughts on the below article by MANUEL F. ALMARIO?
IF the United States decides to rain missiles on North Korea because the latter now possesses nuclear weapons, then it should first nuke Pakistan, India, China, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, then Israel, its protégé, and finally itself — for all of them possess nuclear weapons.
The right to self-defense is the primordial right of individuals and of nations. This right is sanctioned by natural, international and domestic law. When US President George W. Bush identified Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the “axis of evil” and strongly implied that their governments should be exterminated as sources of evil, it became the duty of these countries to prepare to defend themselves, their right to live and their right to be independent. After the US invasion of Iraq, who now can blame Iran and North Korea for thinking that they could be next? Their leaders would be traitors to their people if they did not prepare to defend their nations.
The United States is the first country to use the atomic bomb, killing more than 300,000 people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. It has refused to proclaim that it would not be the first to use nuclear bombs. Under Bush, it has declared and asserted its “right” to undertake “regime change” in another country and to carry out “preventive war,” which is no different from the naked aggression outlawed by international and moral laws.
By exploding a nuclear bomb, North Korea has won the right to survive. The United States has agreed to a United Nations resolution rejecting force as a solution to the crisis. In the past, Russia and China had assured their own survival by developing nuclear bombs and their missile-delivery capacity, thus balancing America’s power. Even the United Kingdom and France, long-time allies of the United States, have decided not to live comfortably under America’s nuclear umbrella. Instead, they developed their own nuclear bombs to assure themselves of their independence and way of life. Cuba warded off another American invasion after the Bay of Pigs by allowing Russia under Khruschev to install missiles in Cuba. The missiles were pulled out only after President John Kennedy promised that the United States would never invade Cuba.
The only solution to the seemingly unstoppable nuclear threat is global nuclear disarmament proposed in the 1950s by world-renowned intellectuals led by Bertrand Russell and Robert Oppenheimer, one of the scientists responsible for developing the atomic bomb. If America is to be respected as a leader, it should junk its imperialist ambition and bullying posture and adopt the happy, humanist principle: live and let live.
Thursday, January 24th 2008 at 1:30 am
Reply to Adolf:
Every nation must look out for its own security. Britain certainly cannot trust the US not after the American revolutionary war and the British-US war of 1812. France has refused to join the US in the war against Iraq. US President George Washington in his farewell address warned the US against “foreign entanglements”. Only by building a deterrent against aggression can a country assure its freedom. In building their own nuclear bomb arsenals, France and Great Britain defied the US effort to maintain nuclear monopoly. MF Almario
Tuesday, November 7th 2006 at 7:54 pm
wow..
I expected a good conversation… it seems that I am to be disappointed.
Sunday, October 29th 2006 at 3:59 am
N. Korea signed a treaty by which it agreed to allow inspectors in and not develop nuclear weaponry. In return they received resources they desperately needed. They pulled out of this treaty well before Bush ever declared them a member of the Axis of Evil. In effect their leader decided that people starving on a level comparable to China’s famine of the late 50’s is not deserving as much of consideration as being a member of the nuclear club.
Also, it worries the US that a Nation which is heavily involved in the drug trade, counterfeiting of US currency, and selling weapons technology to the highest bidder could have knowledge of how to make a nuke and then start selling them to the highest bidder.
disarmament will never happen. nothing can return the Earth to a time before nuclear weapons. To have that as the only end goal is to get nothing accomplished when something can still be accomplished.
Communication and open dialogue prevent Nuclear war and all war. It is not a scary thing for a rational Nation to have nuclear weapons. It is a scary thing to have an isolated Nation with a huge percentage of its population starving(actually being under-height due to chronic malnutrition) that has nothing to lose in a nuclear exchange.
More fingers need to be pointed in China’s direction for not doing more to get N. Korea in line with the rest of the world. They are playing one hell of a game of Geo-politics with this situation. Posturing themselves to look the best and have as much of the limelight as possible in resolving all this. Much like what T. Roosevelt did with the Sino-Russian War back just over 100 years ago.
America also wishes to avoid War with N. Korea as much as possible due to the trade connections between S. Korea and the rest of the world. Many of the electronics we are using right now are made or owned by companies located less than 100 miles from the DMZ. The effects of the War would be devastating to the worlds economy.
What else could have held Bush back from taking some action premptively against Kim Jung Il?
Tuesday, October 24th 2006 at 5:43 pm
Even the United Kingdom and France, long-time allies of the United States, have decided not to live comfortably under America’s nuclear umbrella. Hmmm….maybe they thought, ” Hey what if something goes horribly wrong and the U.S. is invaded somehow. Maybe we should be prepared for that occasion.” Just because an ally makes weapons doesn’t mean they are going to turn on you or don’t trust you. Chance favors the prepared and the U.K. and France were just trying to have their asses covered for such an occasion? Want me to destroy your argument further? I’ll leave it at that for now hippy.
Tuesday, October 24th 2006 at 2:00 pm
we live in a fucked up country…. a fucked up world. It really is, right now, the most dangerous time in civilization. Everyone is power hungry (same as it always was), everyone wants the best available leverage in financial assests (same as it always was). The reality is that America is one of the dirtiest nations EVER!!! we were built by criminals and that influence is everywhere you look in this country. But every other country is just as dirty. So even though I don’t agree with certain politics and can’t stand how “we the people” get taken advantage of and treated like we are morons. I still love my country. Is that naive ?