As every August – when there are no news to write about, and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki anniversaries come very handy – the calls for the abolition of nuclear arsenals are heard from more or less predictable sources. Let them call as much as they want. Personally, I am very happy with things as they are now, and will not join the calls for the abolition of anything – minus Iran and North Korea, of course; but of this later -.
The danger of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is what has given us decades of peace in all major Western Countries. Moreover, it has allowed the application of the famous NATO military doctrine, that is: the open statement – and threat – that a conventional Warsaw Pact attack would have been countered with a nuclear retaliation. This has allowed the West to dedicate huge economic energies to further economic growth, in preference to what would otherwise have been an immense military effort. As it was, the seriously inferior Western armies – and the economies of the West – were allowed to rest in the shadow of a comparatively cheap, extremely effective, technology-enhancing nuclear umbrella.
The last seventy years have known no major international or intercontinental conflicts, and certainly no world wars. Regional, limited conflicts (like Corea, Indochina, Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq II, you know the names…) and endemic local, war-like situations with outburst of war (like Israel & Arabs, India &Pakistan) is all we had. On a global scale, this is small change compared to what happened before, and never threatened in the least the security and welfare of the West.
As a result of the threat of MAD, seven decades of peace have fostered unprecedented economic growth for everyone. Even Francis' “poor of the poor”, as a general rule, never had it as good as now; at least, whenever their own corruption and stupidity did not manage to destroy their economies nevertheless.
But not only do I see the enormous service that huge nuclear arsenals have made to everyone of us. I also see in them a great device for the preservation of Christian culture in the future.
I have already written that it appears that Russia and China will be the heralds of Christianity in the decades to come, as the USA and Europe transform themselves into perverted, heathen wasteland worshipping the gods of the Sodomites, or a heathenism on its way to become Nazism on steroids. Without nuclear weapons, the USA and Europe together would not hesitate to try to strangle those emerging Christian Countries, and ram their own new religion of politically correct madness and sexual perversion down their throat. It is the nuclear arsenals that will prevent this from happening. And it is because of them that a smart welter weight like Russia, or a big but still fragile boxer like China, can be a credible counterweight to what would otherwise be the absolute dominance of the Western Heavyweight and of its allies.
No. The nuclear arsenals have served us wonderfully in the last seventy years. They will continue to do so, and they must continue to do so, as the aspirations of the wrong type of Country (Iran, Pakistan, North Corea) to obtain a credible nuclear capability is, in case, even better evidence of the necessity of nuclear arsenals. Unless, that is, you are so thick that you believe that if the USA destroyed their nuclear arsenal Iran would not be interested in having one. But not even Francis is as thick as that, so there…
That's it, then. I thought I would swim a bit against the current on this, because every August I must hear the same trite slogans, and enough is enough.
1) Both were made for a good cause and with good intent.
2) Both got out of control, and disaster ensued.
3) Both released highly toxic materials.
4) Both caused negative consequences lasting for decades.
5) Both show an astonishing lack of proper internal controls.
6) Both show clear lack of communication, inept damage limitation, and a massive dose of wishful thinking.
7) Both caused serious consequences for generations of innocent people.