Recommended NZ | Guide to Money | Gimme: Competitions - Giveaways

Nuclear Weapons in the "wrong hands"?

Read More:
Contributor:
Dallas Boyd
Dallas Boyd

Recent propaganda from Isis has claimed that they could obtain nuclear weapons within the year. Even if this is the “sum of all fears for Western intelligence agencies”, history has shown that reducing the threat of nuclear warfare, or working to prevent nuclear weapons falling into the “wrong hands”, has never been the top priority.

The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty (NPT) obligates those who have signed it to make efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons – however the world leaders have more or less just used this treaty to wipe their arses. It’s been violated by all nations that signed it, with the United States leading the pack in its refusal to abide by various articles, and especially rejecting the call to eliminate nuclear arsenals completely.

Instead, the U.S. has officially reserved the right to use nuclear weapons in the first strike, even against those who don’t have the technology themselves. In 2002 it was outlined by the Air Force Space Command (the hob-nobs who control advanced space-age nuclear weaponry) that the U.S. would move from “control” of space to “ownership” of space. So basically, anywhere in the world, at any time, could be annihilated by nuclear or laser weapons that are being shot from outer space. Death from all directions! It almost sounds like a bad Austin Powers plot. But all this “enhanced security” does is increase the threat of terror and spawn an ever-escalating, humanity-threatening, arms race.

In regard to nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands - it’s questionable that there are any “right hands” for them to be in, in the first place… When the United States invaded Iraq after the September 11 attacks, it’s not 100% true that weapons of mass destruction were not found. Equipment for developing WMD (e.g. missiles, nuclear weapons, and biological toxic weapons) was present, as it’d been provided as aid to Iraq, from the U.S. and Britain, during the 1980’s. During the U.S. invasion, the sites containing this equipment were left unguarded, as they dismissed the U.N. inspectors. The dangerous goods were subsequently looted and it was reported that one in every eight trucks crossing the border from Iraq into Jordan, carried a cargo of radioactive materials. Off, off and away, into the wild blue this equipment went! The war actually provided terrorists with the means to produce WMD and the anti-U.S. sentiment to boot. What sites were being protected by the U.S, while this equipment was being looted? Iraq’s oil fields of course 

In the 1955 “Russell-Einstein Manifesto”, Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein reached out as nothing more than “human beings” to present us with the “stark and dreadful and inescapable” problem: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?

The Manifesto requested us to ask, “not what steps can be taken to give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps; the question we have to ask ourselves is: what steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issue must be disastrous to all parties?”

They warned humanity that if these new steps and new way of thinking could not produce non-violent conflict resolutions, “there lies before you the risk of universal death.”

The risk of universal death? That's some heavy shit. Perhaps in my next blog I will stick to discussing Bruce Jenner’s gender re-assignment surgery.

All articles and comments on Voxy.co.nz have been submitted by our community of users. Please notify us through our contact form if you believe an item on this site breaches our community guidelines.