WAR AGAINST - THE WORLD!

By

John Roberts(2002)

Being more thoughts on the present International Situation.

Recent outbursts by GW Bush, President of the USA, against terrorists, who constitute a threat to the United States, indicate that he is under very great personal strain. This strain is clearly evident upon observation of Mr President's physiognomy during televised public appearances. In fact, the question of his sanity comes into question. The cause of such concern on my part, is his ardently expressed desire to launch one or more of his "clean" nuclear missiles upon those Islamic States, which he and his advisors deem to be capable of producing "dirty" nuclear missiles and of launching them against the United States.

Why one should seek to draw a distinction between nuclear weapons of any kind, eludes me, unless it is to point out the relative destructive power of the weapon. The layman is, perhaps, to be excused for thinking that all nuclear weapons, of whatever type and power and, by whomsoever held, are "dirty" in the fullest sense of the word

One can only conclude that the term "dirty", for the purposes of Mr Bush's definition, is applied by him to those nuclear weapons that may be manufactured, at some time in the future, for use against the USA and its allies.

Those Islamic nations which, at present, appear to be the target of Mr Bush's verbal posturing, might well be justified in believing that the thousands of nuclear weapons, held by the United States itself, are dirty weapons. Whether or not the weapons are to be regarded as "dirty", may be debatable. What is certain, however, is that the thoughts giving rise to these threats are themselves, unquestionably, "dirty".

There can be no doubt that the USA has cause for alarm. The image of "Fortress America", with its vast and powerful armaments, its world-wide spy system, capable of penetrating to the backyards of any place on earth, has received a severe shock. The soft-underbelly of North America has been penetrated and serious damage inflicted. Not only have many innocent people been killed, but, more importantly for Mr President, the pride of the United States has been humbled. Worse still, there are rumblings and portents of more harm to follow. A discredited internal surveillance system, has been proven to be deficient: riddled with petty, internecine jealousy and rivalries. The vast domestic and international spy network has failed, in spite of clear warnings, to reveal the extent of the danger facing the United States from fanatical enemies. It has, therefore, to exert itself to discover new threats from within as well as without. The witch hunt has begun in earnest. People with brown skins, black hair, Semitic noses and heavy eyebrows, are at risk.

Such is the state of panic within the USA at present, that nobody feels safe from the ever-present danger of death or injury from terrorist activity. Mr Bush's answer to the problem, is to make the sort of threats to the world, at large, with which we are now all familiar. These threats are ostensibly directed against those Islamic nations, regarded by the United States administration, as enemies, or as potential enemies.

However, a threat to attack another nation, using conventional weapons, no-matter how lethal they may be, is one thing, but to make a serious intimation as to the use of nuclear weapons, is quite another kettle of fish. The United States itself, set the precedent in l945, when its President Truman authorised the dropping of two nuclear bombs, tiny by today's standards, which wiped out two large industrial cities and killed some hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese people. These bombs were not dropped on the Capital city, Tokyo, as one might have expected, as to do so would be to wipe out the governing elite.

Since the Second World War, serious consideration has been given by the USA, from time to time, to the use of nuclear weapons, against its perceived enemies. Specifically, by L.B. Johnson(during the Vietnam conflict) and Richard (Tricky Dicky) Nixon, at the latter end of that War. This is the first time, however, that a direct threat of nuclear action has been made by the USA against its imagined foes, since the end of the "Cold War". That the threat is real, cannot be denied.

It is now common knowledge that the USA has used weapons, containing depleted Uranium, in both the Gulf and Serbian conflicts. I have previously mentioned the fact (in one or more of my essays on the USA's abuse of its military power) that American soldiers have been exposed to radioactive contamination and, as a result have suffered serious injury.

Only a seriously disturbed person could contemplate the use of nuclear weapons in this day and age. The bombs dropped on Japan in l945, contaminated victims, living near the site of "Ground Zero", for many years and caused untold suffering to themselves and their offspring. What will be the effect, if the United States unleashes one or more of its present massive arsenal of nuclear weapons upon the world? It is too horrible to contemplate!

Land contaminated by depleted uranium bombs, remains dangerous for many years. How much more so when affected by full-blown atomic weapons? The area for miles around the site of the Chernobyl disaster, in the Ukraine will remain uninhabitable for generations to come.

The dangers of nuclear fallout have been well documented. In the event of several, not to suggest numerous, massive explosions, it is not inconceivable that contamination of the upper atmosphere might well make life on Earth impossible for humankind. The effects of a Nuclear Winter would be disastrous for everyone, including those of our politicians, who might seek the safety of their secure nuclear shelter: secure, if only until their air, food and water supplies run out. In the meantime, they will remain imprisoned, unable to venture forth.

There is no doubt that extensive nuclear damage in the Middle-East, would make life intolerable, not only for the Iraqis, but for the people of all adjacent nations. Nuclear fallout could quite conceivably travel via upper air currents, finding its way even to the USA. None of the countries of the Northern Hemisphere would escape the inevitable contamination that would follow and even the Southern Hemisphere would not be exempt from contamination. Trade routes would also be affected and could seriously damage international trade and commerce.

Such is the extent of the hysteria affecting the United States, at the present time, that it can see no solution to the problem of its relations with the Arab world, other than that of the application of force. It fondly imagines that, by use of a heavy handed approach; demonstrating the awesome fire-power and destructive capacity of its armed forces, it will succeed in neutralizing the threat from militant terrorists. What will the US achieve by flattening Baghdad and destroying the Euphrates valley? The cradle of civilization! It will remove one possible threat. What sort of threat is there to the USA from Iraq? Absolutely none! The Gulf War destroyed Iraq's armies and equipment and thoroughly demoralized the nation. Since that time, periodic, sustained, wholly illegal and thoroughly immoral bombing, has kept Iraq under the thumb of the United States. (New information is lately to hand, as to the orders recently given by President Bush to that bastion of international infamy, the CIA, to increase its spying and subversive activity against Iraq, preparatory to a prospective invasion by the United States. Bush has, reportedly, ordered CIA Agents to apprehend President Hussein of Iraq and, if he resists, to "kill him!" The President of an independent and Sovereign State! Such a proposition is unbelievable, in connection with the President of the United States of America! Yet, we are assured that the statement is correct. Is this "Terrorism" or is it not? Such ideas indicate a Mafia-style approach to the problem by G.W. Bush. What an evil man is George Bush and a diabolical brotherhood, this present US Administration?)

To suggest that either Libya or Somalia represent a threat to the US is ludicrous. Any danger to the people of the USA comes from "terrorists" Moslem fanatics, who bitterly resent the arrogant and ill-considered interference of the USA, in the affairs of the Middle-Eastern nations, over a period of many years, beginning with Iran in the 70's and followed by Iraq, Libya and Somalia. Part of this resentment is cultural, in origin, flowing from the post-war dominance by the United States in world trade and its conceived moral shortcomings.

Following the Sept l l debacle, the USA invaded Afghanistan, convinced (albeit without a vestige of evidence) that Bin Laden's organization was being promoted and supported by the Taliban-dominated Government. It pummelled that already war-weary and unhappy country, using massive conventional bombing techniques, in which its aircraft and personnel were not exposed to any danger from ground-fire. The USA, supported by some of its allies, pulverised the mountain tops and cities of this country, destroying what serviceable property was left after the Russian and subsequent Civil Wars. How many thousands of innocent Afghans were killed is unknown. What is certain is that Mr Bin Laden, Public Enemy No l was not found, nor, it appears, is anything known as to his whereabouts. This outrageous invasion of a sovereign nation is continuing, with hardly a voice raised in protest.

However, in spite of the failure to arrest the Terrorist leader, a number of persons were taken prisoner, who were alleged to be members of a Terrorist Organization. Whether or not these people were supportive of the Sept l l Brigade, is not known but, at least, they were people who could be regarded as enemies of the USA and, therefore, subjected to the inhumane treatment, which we have observed to be the lot of those prisoners who have been detained at the USA's Cuban base. All this is quite contrary to international law and the law relating to prisoners of war, as embodied in the Geneva Convention, to which the United States is a Party. Mr. Bush's explanation is: that these people are not prisoners of war but "Terrorists": a very subtle distinction. The fact that they are in custody as a result of President Bush's Invasion of Afghanistan, does not, evidently, mean that they come within the scope of "prisoners of war", although they are, undoubtedly, such.

We now have the situation in which any person, who can be said to be unhappy with the way the USA is running this world, is a "terrorist" or a potential terrorist and, therefore, to be restrained and maltreated, without regard for that sense of decency and fair play, which was the hall-mark of the Western mind.

President Bush's introduction of legislation to deny US citizens, accused of Terrorism, the rights entrenched within their far-famed but much maligned “Constitution”, demonstrates the extent of the paranoia affecting US affairs, at the present time. It is evidence of a clear decline in the moral and spiritual values, formerly held out, as constituting an important principle within the public life of the people of United States. The concept of the "Land of the Free" is now clearly seen to be pure humbug.

There are two Australian Citizens :Muslims, who were evidently, arrested in Afghanistan and transported to Cuba, in the Atlantic: where they have been confined in inhumane conditions. What protest has there been forthcoming from John Howard, Politician and presently Prime Minister of Australia; in respect of their illegal detention? They have committed no offence, under either Australian or International Law. How can their presence in Afghanistan represent a threat to America? As Muslims, are they disbarred from visiting another Muslim State and conducting themselves lawfully within that community. Just what was their Crime? Why has not this staunch friend and supporter of President Bush demanded their return to Australia? There is only silence on this most important aspect of Australia's Sovereign power. Has it been surrendered totally to the United States?

The simple fact is, that nobody can commit an offence against anyone, in the absence of some clear legal provision, either by Statute or Common Law, prohibiting specific conduct. Outside the United States, they cannot be subject to US Law. Since Sept l l, The Bush administration has introduced emergency legislation to abrogate all constitutional protection within the USA, for “alleged terrorists”. The Cuban Base has been used as a convenient extra-territorial venue, wherein these poor souls may be tormented, with impunity, without a shred of evidence linking them to the Sept l l conspiracy and with all the barbarity of which the US federal prison system is capable.

The failure of Prime Minister Howard to demand the repatriation of these two Australian citizens, is a disgrace to Australia and a base denial of the British principles of "Fair Play and Trial by Jury”: so much applauded by persons of the class of John Howard and conveniently disregarded, when it suits him to do so.

Bush's threat to "Nuke" his Islamic enemies, is a threat, not merely to Islam, but to the whole World. It is a clear admission of failure on the part of the United States, to comprehend the basic nature of the problem. This has been outlined by me in previous essays but may conveniently be repeated here:

The cause of the ill-will presently subsisting between Islam and the USA is the utter inability of successive U.S. Administrations, to comprehend the place of Islam in this world and the nature of its relationship with the Jews. This has resulted in oppression by the United States of various Islamic States and the promotion of Israeli interests, over a period of half a century, in opposition to those of the Palestinian people. These are policy questions, which must be equitably resolved, if peace is to be re-established between Jew and Arab and between the Islamic nations of the world and the United States. Questions involving World Trade and "Globalization" have also played a major part in creating suspicion of the motives of the United States, within Islamic communities. Oil supplies are a major factor in the continued persecution of Iraq and Iran by the United States. As with so many of the foreign policies of the USA, economic factors are often the underlying cause for incomprehensible decisions, made at Governmental level.

The President would be well advised to gather together his War Council, to seriously discuss ways to limit his aggressive posturing, as it is this, combined with the errors of his predecessors, that have led to the breakdown in relations between East and West. Some honest voice must be raised to convince the people of the USA that there has to be a change of policy towards the Arab and Islamic peoples. The latter must be convinced that there has been a change of attitude on the part of America towards the people of Islam. This cannot come from the Islamic States, who have suffered so much, Socially, Militarily and Economically from US interference and bias.

Until the occasion of resentment, despair and hatred are removed, the present danger will continue unabated, not merely to the Islamic States, Israel and the USA, but to the world at large.

The so-called "War against Terrorism", with the introduction of the Nuclear element, really takes on the nature of a "War against the World", for the whole of humankind will suffer, if GW Bush is allowed to vent his spleen on his foes in such an inhuman and criminally irresponsible manner. The United States remains a part of the world and cannot be segregated or separated from the rest of humankind.

Mankind can be thankful for the fact of a, belated, disinclination on the part of one or two of the supporters of the USA, specifically France and Great Britain, to concur in his proposals regarding the use by the USA of nuclear weapons. One also might speculate as to the degree of resistance on the part of the citizens of the USA, to Bush's proposition. One could expect, given the existence of many sincere and open minded Americans, that opposition to Nuclear War would be considerable, in view of the obvious risks to everyone on this Globe.

Let us pray (once again) that sanity will, eventually, prevail.

Finis

JohnRoberts,

Sydney, Australia.

16th June 2002.

Send E-mail to author

.