Then there is or is not the aspiring candidacy of Iran, dependent upon how one views the propaganda warfare between that nation and Israel, some claiming that an "evil" Iran mitigates, perhaps justifies the militant endeavors of Israel with its occupied territories and closer Muslim neighbors.
It's not a secret that Pakistan and India view each other with itchy nuclear trigger fingers, and that North Korea will use its nuclearity as a none too subtle threat not to interfere with its arguable prerogatives. The baddest dudes in the nuclear gang, however, remain the US, China and Russia, all of whom share in the ill disguised posture: Mess with me and I'll annihilate you and all of humanity if need be!
Does any really decent and intelligent person want his country to employ the ultimate horror weapon? Do we wish to continue the threat in endeavor for diplomatic or crass economic advantage with the possibility that others may rise to the challenge of unveiling their threat and employ its reality, or simply be honestly scared into doing so?
Governments have always been loath to discard any perceived advantage no matter how gruesome its nature. They will sit and talk, perhaps negotiate away some useless surplus beyond the capability to destroy life on earth, but little more can be realistically expected of them.
This leaves us all in the position as people who must make the decision beyond our respective government's capacity of sensibility and compassion for the fate of us all -- and to what end, to what chance for our success? Unfortunately, slim chance indeed, unless there is reality in the messiah phenomenon, and such arrives and wrests the world's scepter from the clutch of presidents, congressmen, prime ministers, despots, greed giants and madmen.
Although it would be in all probability an exercise in futility, it's interesting to contemplate how a vote by the American people would address our fate in dealing with the reality of the nuclear menace.
Apparently our basic choices could be three: (1) The decent and smart way, by cooperatively but verifiably eliminating all nuclear weapon stockpiles including our own, as well the world-wide availability of all nuclear material of weapons capability, or (2) that we destroy everyone else in the world except those within the borders of the United States, or (3) that we abide the current privileged inventory status until others inevitably achieve competitive arsenals which will allow everyone to destroy each other, that is humanity.
I prefer Option 1, but admit that it requires a level of political integrity, morality and intelligence in the support of such decision that can scarcely be found today amongst our political leadership, their masters, and the fright/hate mongers now so popular.
What we're actually doing now is proceeding down the path of Option 3, but we'd be wise to consider that Option 2 has considerable support.
Admit it now: Aren't you a bit surprised, perhaps shocked by what you thought (perhaps still think) America was, and the reality of what it is?
I'd like to think that a decent regard for our fellow man would prevail atop the morality to persuade our affairs of state, but I'm afraid -- terribly -- that there is little evidence of such today in this the world's once oldest republic.
...........Best regards, in the interim -- Rafe Pilgrim
1
1
1
