Home

Doomsday Clock - Closer to Midnight?

Letter to The Bulletin, from Larry Ross, October 13, 2005

Sir,
I have been researching nuclear war issues since 1945, when some 200,000 people were killed by nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since then you have adjusted the hands of your Doomsday Clock 18 times - closer or further from midnight and nuclear war. This depended on developments in nuclear weapon technology, national policies and international threats and crisis. The last time was in 2002 when you moved it from 9 to 7 minutes to midnight. This was because the U.S. rejected a series of arms control treaties and announced its withdrawal from the ABM treaty; nuclear weapons proliferation to India and Pakistan and the so-called ' terrorist threat'.

It is now 3 years later and I suggest the threat of a nuclear war has increased to the highest level yet for the following reasons:

  1. In spite of the end of the cold war, the U.S., Russia and possibly other states, still maintain thousands of nuclear missiles on a 'launch-on-warning' status. This hair-trigger situation has brought the world within minutes of a nuclear doomsday several times.

    President Kennedy in 1963 warned the world about the increasing threats of a nuclear war when he said:

    " We all live under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident, miscalculation or act of madness".

    This perilous and continuing dance with global death could suddenly end in a global holocaust anytime. It has been warned against many times by eminent scientists, military experts and global statesmen. They have campaigned and petitioned for nuclear missiles to be taken off alert status, but to no avail. The threat has continued so long, most people have become immune and no longer take it seriously. They have been brought up with the 'nuclear sword of Damocles' and regard it as a fact of life important for their security. People simply disregard or deny that the world can end in an afternoon. It almost has several times. This shows the limitations of the human psyche to perceive and take effective action against this type of danger.

  2. The new strategy of the Bush Administration is to incorporate the use of nuclear weapons, as recommended by field commanders, into conventional war situations. The unspoken message is that nuclear weapons are a military tool to be used as necessary, and that the threat of escalation to a global holocaust is not a significant factor. It is the Administration's attempt to change public perception of the nuclear threat and in effect, deny all facts showing that the threat of nuclear self-annihilation is increasingly real. People will notice that the same technique is used by the Administration to deny the facts of global warming. It is significant to note that the Bush Administration has moved from U.S. strategy of nuclear weapons use as a last resort, or a revenge nuclear retaliation after suffering a first strike, to persuading the public that it is okay and perfectly normal to incorporate nuclear weapons use into an option in conventional warfare. Also, that it is okay to use nuclear weapons against those states the administration claims might be harbouring terrorists. Proofs are not needed.

    Before the U.S. and UK invaded Iraq on the basis of lies, Bush and Blair warned Saddam that if he used WMD in defence if Iraq, they would use nuclear weapons against him. This is an excellent example of nuclear conquest based on a framework of outright lies, against a state that has not attacked anyone and had no plans to do so.
    It is also an example of a few totally unprincipled people willing to gamble with the fate of humanity to achieve their illegitimate objectives.

    An actual attack on the U.S. is no longer needed before the Bush Administration launches a war against a hypothetical enemy who the Bush Administration claims, might, one day, develop WMD and attack the U.S.

  3. Pre-emptive nuclear wars have been added to Bush's choice of war options against those he claims are potential enemies.

  4. The use of the pre-emptive war strategy has already been demonstrated with the U.S. illegal war on Iraq. This was planned well before 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Osama Bin Laden or al-Qaeda. It had no WMD or nuclear weapons. Yet the Bush Administration, aided by the UK, Australia and a few other states, created a litany of lies accusing Iraq of these crimes in order to justify going to war. The strategy worked and the public was effectively deceived. Most media supported the war and faithfully repeated Bush lies. Bush, Blair and Howard were all re-elected after the event. This was a very ominous demonstration of the power of war to frighten and befuddle people. Also, that with the right kind of lies, endlessly repeated, and well-managed by psywar experts, a dangerous and corrupt Administration faced with a lacklustre opposition afraid to tell the truth, can fool enough people to be re-elected.

    What that means is that the fate of humanity is in the hands of war criminals who have been richly rewarded
    by the very people they have just deceived.

  5. The quagmire of Iraq is only the beginning. Bush is making similar accusations about Iran and Syria, that he made about Iraq before he attacked. Bush claims that Syria and Iran are aiding Iraqi opponents of the illegal, deceitful U.S. invasion and particularly cruel occupation of their country. Bush simply puts a label on all armed opposition calling it "terrorists" etc, thereby licensing the U.S. and allies to attack them. Any opposition to U.S. expansion anywhere could become targets for pre-emptive war. Bush has already warned the U.S. population that they faced an "endless war of terrorism".

  6. The psychological makeup and mindset of Bush, his neocon Administration and the people he chooses to appoint to high positions is conducive to war. Whereas previous Administrations have had a modicum of balance in their top executives, this is lacking in the Bush Administration. They are of like mind, mainly right-wing extremists, fundamentalists, very ultra pro-Israel, and war contractors like Halliburton. Many top people in the Bush Administration are neo-conservatives who wrote a blueprint for U.S. conquest years before Bush was elected in 2001. Their plan is now being implemented. A civil war in Iraq would provide the U.S. with the additional justification it can use to stay in Iraq indefinitely. They already planned to dominate the middle east region. That's why the U.S. built permanent military bases in Iraq which will also serve as launching pads for further conquest of neighbouring states. Past performance and mutual reinforcement suggests that the Bush Administration won't decide to abort their plans, especially as they have already enjoyed such success. They are not the type to listen to any rational arguments against their plans and would spurn evidence of increasing risk of a nuclear holocaust. They seem intoxicated with their own power and hubris. Their use of depleted uranium weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan, shows that they are not worried about the lethal long-lasting toxic effects of these weapons. They have a half life of 4.5 billion years.

  7. Accidental nuclear war is an increasing risk as nuclear weapons proliferate to Pakistan, India and possibly other states. There are now at least 8 nuclear weapon states. Bush's new nuclear-use and pre-emptive war doctrines, and withdrawal from disarmament treaties, will increase pressures for further nuclear proliferation and arms research and manufacture. That in turn further increases the risks. As well, other states will be encouraged to lower their own standards of nuclear weapon usage by the new U.S. nuclear and pre-emptive war strategy.

  8. Iran, seen by many expert commentators as the next target on Bush's hit list, is much bigger and better prepared for war than was Iraq. Iran also has nuclear weapon-equipped oil friends such as China and Russia who would prefer that the U.S. not be allowed to control Iran's oil, as it now controls Iraq's oil. So what military choices are left to Pentagon plans for war on Iran? Already the Pentagon is bogged down with much of it's conventional military in Iraq.

    The Bush Administration may accuse Iran of being behind a new 'terrorist' attack on the U.S. Whether this accusation is true or not, it would be used by the U.S. Administration as a credible reason to make war on Iran.
    This may be a well planned nuclear attack, such as that Rumsfelt ordered the Pentagon to prepare plans for.

    There is just no way the U.S. could take on Iran and hope to win, without using their huge nuclear weapon advantage. That, coupled with loud accusations of Iran's culpability as justification for U.S. actions, may intimidate China and Russia into not aiding Iran. If they did aid Iran the situation would probably escalate into full scale nuclear war. Iran has had many warnings of what's coming but claims it has the means to deter Bush.

    But Bush, Blair and Howard took a similar but lesser gamble with the Iraq war and it worked much better than they might have expected. They are likely to take a similar gamble in the attempt to conquer Iran.

  9. Bush and many of his supporters and executives in his administration, are Christian Fundamentalists who believe a nuclear war would be a fulfilment of Armageddon - the final battle between good and evil which they believe is promised by God in the Old Testament Bible. Many believe that Bush is appointed by God to help 'bring it on'. True believers will be raptured directly to heaven and unbelievers will rot in hell. Thus they excuse anything...anything at all.... that Bush may do which they believe will help bring this promise to fruition. Millions of American believers of this nonsense would welcome this god-ordained armageddon for themselves and children.

  10. Some insiders, psychiatrists, theologians and informed commentators have commented on Bush's spasms of anger at any criticism; his comments that God has chosen him to lead or instructed him to do certain things including making war on Iraq; his fundamentalist armageddon beliefs and how far they motivate him particularly in the U.S. foreign policy area; his past alcoholism and the severe limitations of recovered alcoholics that seem to effect Bush's behaviour. They make informed predictions of Bush's possible future behaviour and reactions. Bush is not a very sane, stable, intelligent, knowledgeable and wise character that one might hope for in a very, very powerful leader that can bring on a global Armageddon in an afternoon.

    Bush is a very limited individual now caught in a web of lies, surrounding himself with mediocre people whose main virtue is following Bush's instructions. There are no Kennedy's or an Addle Stevenson to say no to Bush.


These are some of the multiple and related risks that tend to reinforce and augment each other.

Many of them are new and very serious increasing risks, and were not taken into account in your previous estimates. People need to be shocked into remedial action to reduce these new and increasingly magnified threats of human self-extinction, and that there is no second chances after a nuclear holocaust.

Therefor I recommend that the hands of the Doomsday Clock be advanced to between 1 and 3 minutes to midnight.


Yours sincerely,
Larry Ross,
Secretary/Founder(1980)
The New Zealand Nuclear Free Peacemaking Association.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Doomsday Clock

by Sean, September 30, 2005

It's the 60th anniversary of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which premiered in December, 1945, just a few months after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The goal of the magazine has always been simple, if somewhat ambitious: to save the world by working to minimize the threat of nuclear war. It came out of a time when physicists were central players in questions of international security. It came out of a time when physicists were central players in questions of international security.

The most famous product of the Bulletin is of course the Doomsday Clock, an iconic image that is far more famous than the magazine itself. The minute hand on the clock moves in response to the perceived danger of imminent global disaster. It's fascinating to peek back at the timeline for the evolution of the clock, as it bounces back and forth in response to world events.

Continue.....

 

 

Home     Disclaimer/Fair Use