Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiWithout a word of public debate, nuclear weapons became a seemingly inevitable fact of life and death on our planet. After World War II ended with two single bombs destroying the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, The Bomb became big business with vast factory complexes on government reservations in several states across the country.
A government agency, now called U.S. Department of Energy, was formed to oversee private contractors who churned out no less than 30,000 nuclear warheads over the next four decades and established the nuclear industry as an economic force in human affairs.
A people's movement to "Ban the Bomb" formed instantly in response to the wartime bombing of Japan, and to the "test bombings" on the lands of the Western Shoshone Nation in Nevada and Utah and the Pacific islanders of the Moruroa Atoll.
From protests on the street to civil disobedience at weapons sites, the public has been vocal and insistent that our only reasonable option is to abolish nuclear weapons. Indeed, in 1996 the World Court issued a landmark decision defending this basic ethic when it declared the manufacture, possession or use of nuclear weapons to be illegal.
The Cold War bomb factories were built in secret in the 1940s and 1950s. They operated without public oversight until the Cold War ended in 1991, when crumbling Russian and U.S. nuclear bomb factories and reactors were forced to shut down.
With the Cold War's end, shocking security issues and environmental contamination throughout Russia and the U.S. bomb complexes were discovered.
Huge inventories of U.S. nuclear waste and weapons-grade plutonium had piled up and were stored in slipshod, temporary containers -- even cardboard boxes tossed into landfills.
The U.S. is for the third time seeking permission from its people to rebuild the nuclear weapons complex. There are eight sites that would be involved in the current DOE vision: Savannah River Site near Augusta, Oak Ridge in Tennessee, Los Alamos and Sandia labs in New Mexico, Pantex in Texas, the Kansas City Plant, Lawrence Livermore in California and the Nevada test site.
There are literally dozens of facilities proposed to be spread around at these eight sites, and the sites are being pitted against each other to lure DOE to set up the new facilities there. SRS, for example, is competing against Los Alamos for a consolidated plutonium center.
Thanks to the National Environmental Policy Act, DOE is now required to hold public hearings for an environmental impact statement before it can build new bomb factories. The public has spoken clearly and unequivocally at each opportunity that we reject nuclear weapons under any and all circumstances.
It has been nearly 20 years now since our country has manufactured new nuclear weapons. Momentum is on the side of nuclear disarmament and the final abolition of weapons of mass destruction. Our national security lies down the path of nuclear waste management, environmental restoration and securing the bomb materials from dismantled weapons.
We have a rare window of opportunity to establish a turning point in human history -- to publicly express the vision and goal that may inspire our country to lead the world in ending the global nuclear nightmare.
Nuclear weapons are a human artifact and it is humanly possible to turn away from the wasteful path of nuclear madness. We can turn our hearts and minds to a new frontier of human ingenuity -- honoring treaties to dismantle nuclear weapons, managing radioactive nuclear waste and securing weapons-grade plutonium and uranium from future use as nuclear weapons.
We are standing at a choice point in history. If it is human nature to learn from our mistakes, then it is wise for us to remember that it was the Bomb itself (and the rockets we developed to deliver them to the other side of our Earth) that showed us the stark and glorious revelation that our planet is finite, fragile and destructible and -- most important of all -- that we are all in it together.
Glenn Carroll of Decatur is coordinator of Nuclear Watch South.
Copyright© 2008 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
21 Comments so far
Show AllStilba,
No point trying reason with lizard, he's got his mind made up and no amount of facts or perspective will make a dent in his black and white world view.
Glenn Carroll is right. The paradigm of MAD specificallly and nuclear deterrence generally no longer makes sense to the body politic of the world. I believe it's possible. If even someone like Ronald Reagan wanted to work for it, then we ought to be able to dissolve the Dr. Strangelove subculture. It will take decades, but it is in every human being's rational self-interest to do so.
The Day of Two Sunrises
My brother and I went to play
By the boats pulled up on the beach.
We raced and played tag
And chased land crabs in the predawn light.
The sun began to light the east
As it always had before,
Suddenly, a second sun arose in the west
Where never the sun had risen!
We ran to Mama to ask her what and why.
She did not know and the new sun died
As quickly as it grew.
In the Men's House, they talked and remembered.
The day began as always, the men to fish in their outriggers,
The mothers cooking and digging taro, gathering plantains
And watching over the children
Who played at fishing and gathering and ran and played tag.
Suddenly, from the sky fell white powder!
Once a missionary had told of snow. Perhaps this was snow!
It came down covering everything. It was sticky.
We played, and scooped it up and threw it at each other. It was fun!
That evening I did not feel so well. My eyes hurt and my stomach turned to water.
My brother's body was covered with blisters and his skin began to fall off.
Mother was vomiting, too, and her beautiful hair
Began to come out in handfuls.
Mother wondered if it was the snow, so she washed us,
But the water was filled with snow and the scrubbing removed the skin.
Soon, the whole village was sick, and the animals, and the plants,
All were sick.
After two days, the strange men came, in boats with a large mouth
Which dropped open on the beach and white clad creatures came out.
They wore masks with strange eyes and a long round mouth.
They pointed sticks at us which buzzed and crackled.
They pointed the sticks at everything, the trees, the well, the fish,
And listened to the buzz and crackle, then made marks on little boards they carried.
Finally they left, but told us we were very sick and not to eat
Of the fish, the coconuts, the plantains, the taro, that they were now tabu.
The men returned in their large boats and said our island was now tabu.
They gathered us up, leaving everything behind
We were taken to another place where we were poked and bled.
We looked so terrible that the people must have been afraid.
They wore the strange white suits when they looked in on us.
My brother looked the worst, like an old man with scabs
Which broke and bled and his teeth fell out
And then he was dead.
Mama became an old woman with patchy hair
And always a sickness.
Each time she saw me, she cried.
I was so sick, so tired, and then one day I died.
* * *
In memory of the Rongalapese and other Islanders who were poisoned by Castle Bravo (13.5 megatons, 1 March 1954) and other bombs. Just collateral damage in the quest for knowledge and power.
Steve Osborn
25 February 2004
Glenn Carroll writes, "Nuclear weapons are a human artifact and it is humanly possible to turn away from the wasteful path of nuclear madness."
Wendell Berry's essay "Property, Patriotism, and National Defense" in his Home Economics (1987) addresses the reality underlying this concern: a human artifact the likes of nuclear weaponry controls us. Such weaponry depends on our ability to hate totally. That we have invested in a technology that demands what it demands of our humanity suggests that importance of living together on this earth has been supplanted by the importance of paying homage to the industry that ensures that we can no longer conceive of the importance of living together.
ramens (6:10 p.m.) is correct:
"Unfortunately abolishing nuclear weapons begins to chip away at the notion that force is the ultimate arbiter of all relations. If we get rid of our nukes, what next??? The militarists would be very distressed, where else can we all make so much money?"
http://www.amazon.com/Home-Economics-Wendell-Berry/dp/0865472750
http://www.brtom.org/wb/berry.html
This is no time to call for a nuclear apartheid. The poor countries need time to develop some minimum credible nuke deterrent, then the world can talk about disarmament.
Even the Spanish didn't anihilate the native population and import slaves! Even the Brits showed more sensitivity for the cultures they subjugated. The US is empire with no class at all.
Stilba: The US built up its nukes in order to achieve world supremacy. What other reason do you suggest? Defense? If that is what you think, I don't think I will argue with you, since such an argument is totally without merit.
Yes, I blame the US for most of the misery in the world. Look at the history and try to find a more belligerent nation in the last 200 years. Count the number of wars the US has been in and tell me who equals it? Granted, the Europeans were bad, but nobody beats the US at theft and plunder. Look at the size of the nation. All stolen in the last 200 years. Show me another country sitting on that much stolen wealth. The Brits, our allies, are the only comparable monsters, but they are old news, the US is today.
I mean to tell everyone that the US and its citizens are a scourge on humanity, it is my duty.
Nice article, Glenn, but it isn't going to happen. I have spent my career on working towards the verifiable banning of nukes (unbelievably, 3 governments including the US paid me good money to do this), and I almost thought I had it made when Clinton signed the CTBT in 1996.
Alas, it was not until 2000 when I discovered the hidden pro-nuke subculture. What an "interesting", twisted and extremely powerful group this is.
The US will never give up nukes. :(
Unfortunately abolishing nuclear weapons begins to chip away at the notion that force is the ultimate arbiter of all relations. If we get rid of our nukes, what next??? The militarists would be very distressed, where else can we all make so much money?
The United States, Russia, China, Pakistan and India should unite together and take the nuclear weapons material and use them in controlled fission to do a very good thing... generate power through by destroying the weapons grade material.
In this form we can all support nuclear power because it rids the world of the bomb and the potential to make them.
All weapons are easier to justify in times of war.
In addition to stopping nuclear weapons,
we need to focus on stopping the political strategy of war.
Glen, nice sentiments but unfortunately humans are not nice. Do you really think that America would give up its arsenal of armaments, the ones that make it topdog in the world? No way, Jose!
America thrives on war, on making armaments, on bullying the rest of the world, on invading and occupying, on building its military bases everywhere, on hegemony. They are its stock in trade, its raison de etre.
Nukes are here to stay. It's only a matter of time before they are used, perhaps only months (on Iran).
We stupid humans will destroy ourselves.
www.dangerouscreation.com
Perhaps the term "choice" should have been replaced with "pivotal" so that the urgency is stressed as opposed to the desire. Regardless, it is inevitable that the world society evolve into a just society which honors human rights at all levels, and that would require that all nuclear weapons be disposed of since they are solely offensive weapons (in both senses of the term).
Although the U.S.A. is the most vile and evil nation to have arisen in recorded history, it certainly is not the only nation which is going to suffer radical and cataclysmic change if recognition of an integrated world society is not deemed to be the only path to future survival of our species. The days of imperialistic control of weaker nations is fast coming to a close and any nation that wishes to confront Nature will find that there is no shortage of weather effects to deal with any non-believers. The pollution derived from nuclear residue necessarily would accumulate, over time, until it poisoned every living thing on the planet, but you can be sure that before that point is reached there will be no human life on this planet to witness it.
Thank You, Glenn Carroll.
This is one of the clearest, most concise pieces of writing on the nuclear nightmare that I have ever seen. The fact that it appeared in AJC, a mainstream publication sometimes called the "Capital of the New South" is heartening.
lizard, I see from your posts in various threads that you are intent on blaming the United States for everything. That may be fashionable here in commondreams, but it ignores more than the most utterly shallow investigation into history, human beings, and the nature of states and empires.
Turn some of that blame and bile into fuel for looking into WHY the US built up its nuke supply, rather than just whining that the US is ALWAYS the bad guy, always the evil one, always your projection or the chip on your shoulder or whatever the hell it is. The world is more than black and white, my friend. Even a short delve into the early history of this issue and the Cold War will likely bring you to a notion more akin to "good intentions gone horribly far south," and not just simple, silly, absurd finger-pointing. That's the only way we're going to have any hope of coming out of this situation.
Mr.Patrick: I work Saturdays.
The time was many times before when the US upped the ante with the Russians and guaranteed an arms race. It should be noted that in that race, the US was ALWAYS the one to escalate. ALWAYS.
The War for Terror
The cuckoo's that came home to nest
spreading fear in the land of the blest
so talking heads could tell us what to hate
and why we need a gulag state
We have steamed up fear and baited hate
and the zion train is running late
Anyone pro fair trade labor or cooperate
may soon well have a Guatanamo date
Total awareness is a mighty big book
Nineteen eighty four was more than a look
Martial law is all it took
to get the puppeteers off the hook
We've got brown shirt and swartzwater thugs
loose in the fertile valley with their blitzkrieg slugs
We've got no oil; say nada; for all that blood
the third world war will be another dud
strife flood and fire are the coupons
for the Mc mansions gated who of who's
that are trading greenbacks for the trump
while the eagle empire becomes a dump
so get out the two flavored one non-entity vote
for the changing of the puppets is at hand
in the land of the free and the brave
where dissent called treason is the knave
the war on terror is what it's not
a war for terror is what we got
One has to admire such optimism. 1945, however, was the time to reject nuclear arms. Today, with nuclear technology metastasized throughout most of the planet and no shortage of blood feuds and apocalyptic nutcases itching to use them, I'd hesitate to call this a "choice point in history."
Stilba -
The Golden Rule and its variants (the categorical imperative, the principle of fairness) asks one difficult thing of its students. It asks that you step out of yourself and, in your imagination, consider what things must look like from somebody else's point of view. From the point of view of your adversaries, it is you who are wrong, you who are monstrous. When I was in the Navy, it was considered natural to expect the mothers of Jamaican girls to provide prostitutes for visiting American sailors. It would have been unthinkable to have asked the mothers of Florida girls to do the same for the Jamaican military. It was not seen as outrageous for Reagan to places mines in Corinto harbor, in the sovereign nation of Nicaragua, and to ignore even a World Court ruling on its illegality. The reverse, for Nicaragua to have been allowed to plant mines in New York Harbor, would have been laughable. And so forth.
So in defense of lizard's contention that the US has a history of unsurpassed belligerence and malignancy, one has to admit that we see ourselves from the inside. We don't see our "brave troops" from the landscape in front of our guns, where people are dying and losing their homelands. We don't give much thought to
the viewpoint of the people we have attacked, native Americans, Mexicans, Filipinos, Vietnamese, a remarkably long list, or imagine for a minute how our history books would holler if such things happened to us (Pearl Harbor - 3000 dead, 9-11 - 3000 dead, compared to, say, the Philippine Insurrection - 200,000 dead or the Iraq invasion - 800,000 dead.) I don't know if we are the worst blight ever to infect the planet. Certainly Attilla the Hun would have done more damage if he had weaponry comparable to ours, but it must be conceded that we have done considerable damage and that we remain oblivious to the vast majority of it.
voxclamantis - Of course I agree with the point about points of view. Here's the thing: I'm a progressive who could easily dismiss my country and every facet of it as evil or stupid or the worst empire of human history (like A LOT of very short-sighted clowns such as Lizard often do here on Commondreams). Stepping out of my empire-hating self, however, requires that I look at US history, compare it to the history of other nations, and make every effort to rationalize, free of prejudice. Doing this as best I can, it seems rather clear that the main difference between the US and other countries/empires is our absurd amount of wealth and power relative to all other nations. "Relative" is the key thing here. No other country has the relative responsibility of the US in regards to the affairs of much of the current world system, and this is a big problem. The United Nations and NATO (which is really the only significant military in all of Europe save Russia) is paid for by US taxpayers. The US taxpayer also funds our military commitments in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Pakistan, Australia, Latin America (Columbia, also the 1947 Rio Treaty), Israel, and now Iraq and Afghanistan, and mmore, as well as our humanitarian commitments in still more places. If the US disappeared, other nations would definately move in to expand their influences and we would only end up with more empires ...maybe worse ones.
Here on Commondreams we can say that all those countries that host us want us out. For some people in those countries it's true, for some it is certainly not. There's ample evidence that the answer is mixed. So, what to do? Split, so Europe has to begin building a military and thus lose its social benefits (because with Russia as a neighbor, it will want to have a military). As empires go, I have trouble finding empires in history with policies and behaviors that are anywhere near as benevolent as those of the modern United States (relatively speaking). We (no longer!) force out native peoples in order to physically colonize new land, and killing civilians is not exactly mandated as it has been in so many historical instances (though in war, we'll always be having loads of dead civilians ...that's why it's Hell and why it's always a mistake!).
As the sole Great Power, the US has no choice but to set the course of planet earth as best it can, because it can, because any other human society would do EXACTLY the same thing in its place ...maybe better, maybe worse. You say US belligerance is unsurpassed, but I suggest you take some of your own good advice. Step into the role of another country and look at its historic atrocities and wars. If you're judging by numbers alone, remember to factor the populations of the time and adjust for inflation before you compare to anything the US has done.
Hell yes, I hate empire! But however pissed I am at how stupid and wrong things are, I daily see ample reason to believe Yankees are not the scourge of the earth of all time. One country simply has too much power (and responsibility). That is the problem. The sooner it balances out, the better.