Oppenheimer, Continued

 

"There was never, from about two weeks from the time I took charge of this Project, any illusion on my part but that Russia was our enemy, and the Project was conducted on that basis." (General Leslie Groves, military commander of the Manhattan Project)

In the movie "Oppenheimer," when Colonel (soon promoted to General) Groves approached Oppenheimer, he told him that Nazi Germany was developing a super bomb and had a one year head start, to which Oppenheimer replied that they had an 18 month lead. A race to build an atom bomb before the Nazis! A retaliatory weapon to hold Hitler in check! This played well with many of the recruited scientists such as Joseph Rotblat a Polish-Jewish physicist who was terrified of the prospect of a Nazi atomic bomb. Later, as the project progressed, Groves entertained some of the top scientists involved informing them that Russia was the enemy. Joseph Rotblat attended one such dinner in the fall of 1944 and was shocked at hearing this. He also had found out that Nazi Germany had no active nuclear weapons development program. He felt that the development of nuclear weapons without a clear and present nuclear danger was wrong so he resigned from the Manhattan Project, the only scientist to do so. One can only wonder what would have happened if more scientists had resigned causing a delay sufficient to permit Japan to successfully surrender (they had been trying) prior to being nuked. Perhaps with no war as justification nuclear weapons would not have been developed. Or perhaps the imperial power seeking imperative would have been so great that future generations were destined to face the probability of nuclear annihilation in any event. And while many of the scientists joined the Manhattan project believing in the reality of the Nazi threat, when that threat proved false all of them except Rotblat continued to work to develop the atom bomb in spite of the obvious implications. Instead they cheered when the test detonation was successful. A job well done, a testament to their brilliance. After the war, Oppenheimer became a critic of the development and use of nuclear weapons after it was too late to have an impact. This amounted to little more than virtue signaling from someone who played a key role in setting the world on course for likely nuclear annihilation.

After the war, the U.S. essentially normalized the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons by the U.S. military. This ongoing U.S. initiated arms race led to the rapid development of much more powerful weapons and delivery systems such that these weapons are now capable of killing all humans on planet Earth many times over mere minutes after a decision to launch is made. This is the predictable legacy of the Manhattan project and American imperial hubris. That we have escaped nuclear annihilation to date is nothing short of a miracle, multiple close calls narrowly averted. The first known incident occurred during the Cuban missile crisis when a Soviet submarine commander, cut off from Soviet command and control and thinking global war had begun, nonetheless, blocked an internal command decision to launch a nuclear torpedo. Had he not acted as he did, World War III may have ensued and none of us would be alive today. How long can humanity continue to dodge a bullet? Yet, instead of nuclear disarmament eliminating this threat to human survival, the U.S. has budgeted over a trillion dollars to modernize its nuclear arsenal. 

The essential problem is that we are ruled by power-seeking psychopaths who have an extremely narrow focus and little concern for those who suffer the consequences of imperial actions including, apparently, their own grandchildren. When the Soviet Union collapsed in the 1990s, this presented the world with a unique opportunity to end the arms race and eliminate nuclear weapons. Instead, the Clinton administration considered this an opportunity to destroy and balkanize Russia and to expand NATO eastward as a U.S. controlled imperial strike force. This financial conquest of Eastern Europe alongside NATO expansion may justifiably be viewed as phase one of Global War 1. The Russian economy was destroyed by the Harvard boys led by Jeffrey Sachs utilizing "shock therapy" with little regard as to the consequences for ordinary Russians as a result of these imperial machinations. Millions were thrown into poverty and life expectancy plummeted as the the U.S. restructured Russian society into a form of oligarchic gangster capitalism as a means to achieve long standing imperial geo-strategic objectives. The unexpected emergence of Vladimir Putin who stopped the worst of these excesses prevented complete imperial victory and caused Putin to become empire's number one enemy. 

By the time Barack Obama became President, virtually all of the Eastern European nations once part of the Warsaw Pact had been turned into imperial vassal states thanks to the financial conquest of the U.S. controlled World Bank and IMF, aided by the CIA, George Soros, and an army of Western NGOs. They were able to use the internet and social media which knows no borders and can be used to destabilize a vulnerable country for imperial conquest relying primarily on soft power. In 2013 the elected President of Ukraine committed an unpardonable sin by maintaining economic ties to Russia and resisting IMF conditionalities, totally unacceptable behavior for a vassal. Hence, the 2014 color revolution which brought about the direct control of Ukraine by the empire through NATO and U.S. sponsored neo-Nazis (Pravi Secktor and Svaboda primarily). These neo-Nazis were utilized to terrorize recalcitrant sectors of the population into compliance. Victoria Nuland, a warmongering neocon in the U.S. State Department oversaw the operation which specifically targeted ethnic Ukrainian Russians. These actions were consistent with the neocon "Project For a New American Century" which advocated smashing potential rivals for global hegemony. Nuland's husband was/is Robert Kagan a prominent neocon warmonger. The 2014 U.S. sponsored coup alongside the subordination of Ukraine's economy and military are phase two of Global War 1.

This neocon led imperial foreign policy was put on temporary hold due to the unexpected election of Donald Trump who, despite numerous other faults, wasn't a deranged warmonger like Nuland and the rest of Hillary Clinton's State Department. As a consequence, a Democratic Party, Deep State and media propaganda campaign was launched against Trump accusing him of being Putin's puppet engaged in some sort of treason by wanting to negotiate with Russia. It was the most groundless and scurrilous attack on a President that I have ever seen, another indication that the empire was/is committed to war with Russia and will not tolerate dissent. The election of Joe Biden brought Victoria Nuland and other neocons back to the State Department where the attack on Russia intensified. The assault on the ethnic Russian areas of the Donbas resulting in about 14,000 ethnic Ukrainian Russians killed by the NATO armed and de facto led Ukrainian military. Plans were made for an all out assault on the Donbas and Crimea by the NATO/Ukrainian army in the spring of 2022, however, these were preempted by Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022. We are now in phase three of Global War 1.

The point which I am trying to make is that the U.S. government didn't need to develop and use the atomic bomb during World War 2. It did so because of the power-seeking geo-strategic advantage this weapon provided. Furthermore, it did so despite the threat such a weapon posed to the survival of the human species. Additionally, the U.S. pursued a nuclear arms race involving technological improvements which made these weapons far more deadly. This was done because this provided a short term geo-strategic advantage even though these new weapons systems increased the threat of nuclear annihilation. And when the Soviet Union collapsed, the U.S. ignored the opportunity to pursue nuclear disarmament and instead saw the opportunity to expand NATO and empire, the pursuit of power stronger than the desire to safeguard humanity's future. And here we should mention the rise of the warmongering Zionist neocons in the Democratic party. Make no mistake, the party of Roosevelt is long gone. So is more-or-less rational imperialism. In its stead we have the New Democrat party of Wall Street, war and empire, its foreign policy in the hands of Zionist neocons whose commitment to Israel and warmongering is ideological and absolute, rationality considered a sign of weakness. Their ideology a secularized version of pre-enlightenment religious fanaticism.  The neocons are not exclusively Ashkenazi. Limited numbers of non-Ashkenazi are welcome to participate if their commitment to Israel and warmongering is compatible. Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton are two examples. And this aggressive warmongering is presented as liberal humanitarianism, the responsibility to protect, humanitarian intervention, bringing the blessings of democracy to the Third World (particularly the Middle East), etc. To this is added the self-righteous zeal and messianic fervor of secularized fundamentalism. 

The future looks bleak. Imperial foreign policy appears to be set by warmongering neocons whose influence is promoted and protected by Zionist fanaticism and ethnic solidarity. The Democratic party is now more-or-less owned by Ashkenazi Zionists who provide the bulk of political funding and set the policies which include unwavering support for Israel and generalized acceptance and support for the "Project for a New American Century" which advocates for massive and increased military spending, including nuclear, and the elimination of potential rivals for both the American led global empire and for Israel. The neocon influence permeates the media and the rest of the deep state. These people are risk takers who view caution and moderation as weakness. The NATO proxy war in Ukraine is a direct consequence of neocon promoted imperial expansion alongside the attempt to destroy the Russian Federation. Add to this the coming global climate crisis and the prospect for nuclear war appears increasingly likely. Lest anyone think that I am exaggerating neocon bellicosity, I close with a quote from notorious neocon Richard Perle:

"If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely, and don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage a total war, out children will sing great songs about us years from now." (Richard Perle)

Mull that over as you contemplate humanity's future.