tuesday's column
Nuclear Bombs:
I heard a caller on a call in show on public radio. He said something that I just could not stand. The discussion was about the current struggle to reign in nuclear proliferation. Some background if you care to know, Many countries around the world, including Iran have ambitions of joining the US and many other nations in the club of nuclear powers. The caller said something to the effect of "how can the US go around telling who gets to have the bomb and who doesnt when the US is the only country to have used it in anger"
On the surface this seems like a harmless statement. But there was something that really bothered me about this. This argument hold no water for two really good reasons. The first is more debateable than the next so lets start with that. The first reason this argument isnt any good is because the US used the bomb to end a war. A terrible war I might add. I firmly believe that dropping the bombs on japan saved millions of lives, on both sides. The japanese were prepared to fight to the last woman and child and the allies, mostly the US, were ready to invade and fight until they won. The invasion would have overcome the resistance eventually due to massive industrial and human strength that the japanese simply couldnt match. But the cost of such an opperation would have been astronomical, in lives and money lost. Furthermore, though the scientist knew that the bomb had immense destructive power, they had no idea the lasting effects of the fall out and radiation. I am not sure that this information would have changed the decision but the reality is the US can certainly not be expected to have known the future.
The second reason that the caller is off base is that though the US has the bomb, huge military capability, and a world of interests to defend, it can be said that America uses discrection. Now before you go nuts saying we get into stupid wars, hmmmm, let me explain what I mean. I mean that in the whole time we have had the bomb we have been in lots fo wars yet the awesome power of the bomb has remained in check. Furthermore in teh 200 plus years the United States has been around, we have kept the same stable system of government. Many of the countries seeking the bomb not only have ambitions of attacking US interests but they also have not had a stable leader for more than even 50 years. It is tough to really tell who is going to be leading a country from week to week. It is tough to tell when a rebel group will spring up and take control of some territory, which could include the bombs. It is unrealistic to think that the powerful nations in the world would sit by and allow this very destructive technology to expand into areas that lack stability and consisant governance. To their credit even the chinese and the north koreans have demonstrated some form of consistancy through the years, though we may not always agree with their positions they at least seem more interested in maintaining their power and policies though a political process.
Iran, Pakistan, and most of africa, have never demonstrated a continuity of governance from one leader to the next. The transfer of power even within their "systems of government" have rarely been peacful or even secure by any standards. Therefore it would be very irresponsible for the americans and europeans to allow these countries to achieve the ultimate in military power.
There are cases that stand out, Israel for example, though never having admitted to having the bomb is widely believed to have it. They are in the middle of a twenty year battle against terrorists who do control some territory and are now in power in what they call a government. Israel has huge security threats on all sides and from within, yet we are all reasonably sure their weapons are secure. They too face criticism from many nations in the world and perhaps deserve some attention as well. Just to make things fair you know.
I heard a caller on a call in show on public radio. He said something that I just could not stand. The discussion was about the current struggle to reign in nuclear proliferation. Some background if you care to know, Many countries around the world, including Iran have ambitions of joining the US and many other nations in the club of nuclear powers. The caller said something to the effect of "how can the US go around telling who gets to have the bomb and who doesnt when the US is the only country to have used it in anger"
On the surface this seems like a harmless statement. But there was something that really bothered me about this. This argument hold no water for two really good reasons. The first is more debateable than the next so lets start with that. The first reason this argument isnt any good is because the US used the bomb to end a war. A terrible war I might add. I firmly believe that dropping the bombs on japan saved millions of lives, on both sides. The japanese were prepared to fight to the last woman and child and the allies, mostly the US, were ready to invade and fight until they won. The invasion would have overcome the resistance eventually due to massive industrial and human strength that the japanese simply couldnt match. But the cost of such an opperation would have been astronomical, in lives and money lost. Furthermore, though the scientist knew that the bomb had immense destructive power, they had no idea the lasting effects of the fall out and radiation. I am not sure that this information would have changed the decision but the reality is the US can certainly not be expected to have known the future.
The second reason that the caller is off base is that though the US has the bomb, huge military capability, and a world of interests to defend, it can be said that America uses discrection. Now before you go nuts saying we get into stupid wars, hmmmm, let me explain what I mean. I mean that in the whole time we have had the bomb we have been in lots fo wars yet the awesome power of the bomb has remained in check. Furthermore in teh 200 plus years the United States has been around, we have kept the same stable system of government. Many of the countries seeking the bomb not only have ambitions of attacking US interests but they also have not had a stable leader for more than even 50 years. It is tough to really tell who is going to be leading a country from week to week. It is tough to tell when a rebel group will spring up and take control of some territory, which could include the bombs. It is unrealistic to think that the powerful nations in the world would sit by and allow this very destructive technology to expand into areas that lack stability and consisant governance. To their credit even the chinese and the north koreans have demonstrated some form of consistancy through the years, though we may not always agree with their positions they at least seem more interested in maintaining their power and policies though a political process.
Iran, Pakistan, and most of africa, have never demonstrated a continuity of governance from one leader to the next. The transfer of power even within their "systems of government" have rarely been peacful or even secure by any standards. Therefore it would be very irresponsible for the americans and europeans to allow these countries to achieve the ultimate in military power.
There are cases that stand out, Israel for example, though never having admitted to having the bomb is widely believed to have it. They are in the middle of a twenty year battle against terrorists who do control some territory and are now in power in what they call a government. Israel has huge security threats on all sides and from within, yet we are all reasonably sure their weapons are secure. They too face criticism from many nations in the world and perhaps deserve some attention as well. Just to make things fair you know.