And so, they state, they could only be attacking Iran for a number of hours, not three days, because they should be paying attention to such a danger. For example, among their conventional weapons, they have hundreds of rocket launchers to fight surface warships in that area of the Caspian Sea. We know that, from the time of the Falklands war, a surface warship can dodge one, two or three rockets.
But imagine how a large warship can protect itself against a shower of weapons of that kind. Those are rapid vessels operated by well-trained people, because the Iranians have been training people for 30 years now and they have developed efficient conventional weapons. You yourself know that, and you know what happened during the last World War, before the emergence of nuclear weapons. Fifty million people died as a result of the destructive power of conventional weaponry.
A war today is not like the war that was waged in the nineteenth century, before the appearance of nuclear weapons. And wars were already highly destructive. Nuclear arms appeared at the very last minute, because Truman wanted to use them. He wanted to test the Hiroshima bomb, creating the critical mass from uranium, and the other one in Nagasaki, which created a critical mass from plutonium. The two bombs killed around , persons immediately.
Besides, a nuclear war would create a nuclear winter. It would be enough if we only had a limited number of them, the amount of weapons owned by one of the least mighty [nuclear] powers, India or Pakistan. Their explosion would be sufficient to create a nuclear winter from which no human being would survive. That would be impossible, since it would last for 8 to 10 years. In a matter of weeks the sunlight would no longer be visible.
Mankind is less than , years old. So far everything was normalcy. The laws of nature were being fulfilled; the laws of life developed on planet Earth for more than 3 billion years. Men, the Homo sapiens, the intelligent beings did not exist after 8 tenths of a million years had elapsed, according to all studies.
Ubuy Kuwait Online Shopping For iv in Affordable Prices.
Two hundred years ago, everything was virtually unknown. Today we know the laws governing the evolution of the species. Scientists, theologians, even the most devout religious people who initially echoed the campaign launched by the great ecclesiastical institutions against the Darwinian Theory, today accept the laws of evolution as real, without it preventing their sincere practice of their religious beliefs where, quite often, people find comfort for their most heartfelt hardships.
I think nobody on Earth wishes the human species to disappear.
- iLiYa (The Dawn Child).
- Seigneurs Sith - Maîtres Sith - Membres de l'Ordre Sith!
- Dracula (Les grands classiques Culture commune) (French Edition).
We must provide a guarantee for peace to all peoples without distinction, to the Iranians as well as the Israelis. Natural resources should be distributed. They should! But there would be no other alternative for humanity, in a world of limited dimensions and resources, even if all the scientific potential to create renewable sources of energy is developed.
We are almost 7 billion inhabitants, and so we need to implement a demographic policy. You realize that only enthusiasm can truly lead a person to say that he or she will confront and easily resolve a problem of such proportions. Truman said that Hiroshima was a military base and that there would be no harm to civilians. That is, not at the level of reality but at the level of [military] doctrine and propaganda.
But nowadays the falsehoods have become much more sophisticated, more widespread, and nuclear weapons are more advanced. So, we are dealing with the future of humanity and the threat of a nuclear war at a global level. The lies and fiction underlying [US] political and military discourse would lead us to a Worldwide catastrophe in which politicians would be unable to make head or tails of their own lies.
Then, you said that intelligent human beings have existed for , years, but that same intelligence, which has now been incorporated in various institutions, namely the media, the intelligence services, the United Nations, happens to be what is now going to destroy us. Because we believe our own lies, which leads us towards nuclear war, without realizing that this would be the last war, as Einstein clearly stated. A nuclear war cannot ensure the continuation of humanity; it is a threat against the world.
Fidel Castro Ruz: Those are very good words, Professor.
The collateral damage, in this case, could be humanity. War is a crime and there is no need for any new law to describe it as such, because since Nuremberg, war has already been considered a crime, the biggest crime against humanity and peace, and the most horrible of all crimes. Michel Chossudovsky. After the Second World War, the Allies wanted to use it against the conquered, and I am not saying that this is not valid, but the crimes that they committed, including the crimes committed against Germany and Japan, are never mentioned.
With a nuclear weapon, in the case of Japan. What can we do? We do not know, but we presume that if man becomes aware of his own existence, that of his people, that of his loved ones, even the U. As all of this is sheer madness, no politician is exempt from the duty of conveying these truths to the people.
One must believe in them, otherwise there would be nothing to fight for. Fidel Castro Ruz. But here we are talking about how the media, particularly in the West, are hiding the most serious issue that potentially affects the world today, which is the danger of nuclear war and we must take it seriously, because both Hillary Clinton and Obama have said that they have contemplated using nuclear weapon in a so-called preventive war against Iran.
Well, how do we answer?
What do you say to Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama regarding their statements pertaining to the unilateral use of nuclear weapons against Iran, a country that poses no danger to anyone? This has been revealed recently, namely far-reaching arguments within the Security Council of the United States. That is the value of the book written by Bob Woodward, because it revealed how all these discussions occurred. I am writing the latest reflection, actually, about that.
The only one who got there, and gave him advice, who had been an opponent because of his Republican Party membership, was Colin Powell. He reminded him that he was the President of the United States, encouraging advice. I think we should ensure that this message reaches everybody; what we have discussed. I think many read the articles you have published in Global Research. I think we need to disclose, and to the extent that we have these discussions and harbor the idea of disclosure. I am delighted every time you argue, reasonably, and put forth these issues, simply, in my opinion, there is a real deficit of information for the reasons you explained.
Now, we must invent. What are the ways to make all this known? At the time of the Twelve Apostles, there were 12 and no more, and they were given the task of disseminating the teachings a preacher transmitted to them. Sure, they had hundreds of years ahead of them. We, however, we do not have that. Some people think the threat comes from Iran, others say they [the Iranians] are terrorists, and there is a lot of disinformation in the movement itself.
Condition des personnes en Germanie dans le haut Moyen Âge
Besides, at the World Social Forum the issue of nuclear war is not part of the debate between people of the Left or progressives. During the Cold War there was talk of the danger of nuclear conflict, and people had this awareness. At the last meeting held in New York on non-proliferation, under the United Nations, the emphasis was on the nuclear threat from non-state entities, from terrorists. President Obama said that the threat comes from Al Qaeda, which has nuclear weapons. Look, what do I do with the reflections? They are distributed in the United Nations, they are sent to all governments, the reflections, of course, are short, to send them to all the governments, and I know there are many people who read them.
The problem is whether you are telling the truth or not.
Of course, when one collects all this information in relation to a particular problem because the reflections are also diluted on many issues, but I think you have to concentrate on our part, the disclosure of essentials, I cannot cover everything. In my opinion, the debate on the future of humanity is also part of a revolutionary discourse. That is the message we must convey to a large number of people. It will no longer depend on who are those who say it, but on the fact that somebody [and eventually everybody] says it. You have to figure out how you can reach the informed masses.
The solution is not the newspapers. There is the Internet, Internet is cheaper, Internet is more accessible. I approached you through the Internet looking for news, not through news agencies, not through the press, not from CNN, but news through a newsletter I receive daily articles on the Internet. Over pages each day. Yesterday you were arguing that in the United States some time ago two thirds of public opinion was against the war on Iran, and today, fifty-some percent favored military action against Iran. Then, when we have a press that gives us things like that, with the distribution that they have, it is a lot of work [on our part].
We have limited capabilities to reverse this process [of media disinformation] within the limited distribution outlets of the alternative media.
Tibet: A quand l'Indépendance ?
In addition to that, now many of these alternative media are financed by the economic establishment. That in the case of a nuclear war, the collateral damage would be humanity as a whole. They are deceived; they are drugged with military superiority and modern technology and do not know what they are doing. They do not understand the consequences; they believe that the prevailed situation can be maintained.
It is impossible. They believe they are in another era, they do not remember what Einstein said when he stated he did not know with what weapons World War III would be fought with, but the World War IV would be fought with sticks and stones. It would be enough to have strategic nuclear weapons of the 25, possessed by the eight powers mentioned exploding in order to create temperatures below freezing all over the planet and a long night that would last approximately eight years.
He told me that personally, at an international conference he was giving, where I had the honor of conversing with him. Well, but I start from an assumption: If a war breaks out in Iran, it will inevitably become nuclear war and a global war. Such a war in Iran today would not remain confined to the local level, because the Iranians would not give in to use of force. If it remained conventional, it would be a war the United States and Europe could not win, and I argue that it would rapidly turn into a nuclear war.
If the United States were to make the mistake of using tactical nuclear weapons, there would be consternation throughout the world and the US would eventually lose control of the situation. The Saudis are not going to fight in Iran, nor are the Pakistanis or any other Arab or Muslim soldiers.
Related linstigateur (MAÎTRES ET ESCLAVES t. 4) (French Edition)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved