At last, after the mindless, terrifying posturing of Trump and Kim Jong In, there’s a bit of common sense in this latest nuclear crisis. A group of Democrat politicos, including Mark Lew, are demanding a change in legislation that would strip the American president of his current power to launch a nuclear attack without Congress’ authorization. This piece of legislation is currently backed by 50,000 signatures from the American public. A previous version of the law was signed by 500,000 people.
In this clip from The Ring of the Fire, the front man not only welcomes this piece of legislation, which would restrain Trump as someone too dangerously unstable to have this power, but asks why it was never passed before. All the past presidents, including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan and George Dubya, had the power to launch a nuclear missile somewhere without having to seek Congress’ approval. This means that they could destroy a region anywhere, and leave it uninhabitable for 30 years. The presenter makes the point that no-one should power.
He’s absolutely right. The British comics writer and creator, Pat Mills, made a similar point back in an edition of Diceman, a comic whose strips were all Role-Playing Games. In one of these, the reader played Ronald Reagan, who had to go back in time to undo the series of events which were about to start a nuclear war with the former Soviet Union. Mills wrote in the notes to the game a piece detailing how little operational machinery there was in place to check a president’s decision to launch a nuclear attack, or halt hostilities once they had began. These procedures were so few that, if America had been on the brink of a nuclear to the point where the president had gone aboard Airforce 1 to escape an attack on the White House, his chance of contacting the Russian premier to negotiate a peace and pull back from Armageddon would depend literally on a three mile length of wire dangling from the aircraft as an emergency aerial.
And this was under Reagan, whose rhetoric and conduct towards the USSR and Communism was especially belligerent. He nearly started a nuclear holocaust himself with that stupid joke he made at a Republican rally. He stood in front of the cheering crowd, and declared that ‘Congressed has passed legislation outlawing the Soviet Union. Bombing begins in five minutes’. A little while later, the Observer reported under the headline, ‘Nearly the Last Laugh of All’, that after Reagan made that stupid joke, one of the Soviet nuclear bases in Siberia went on red alert for half an hour before standing down.
We can’t have the power to start a nuclear war, and turn this planet into a lifeless cinder, unilaterally held by the President, without a comprehensive system of check. It shouldn’t be held by Reagan, Barack Obama or Clinton, let alone a pratt like Trump.
I have a feeling that the system may have been set up the way it has been for swiftness of response. If Russia had fired nuclear missiles at America, the president could have launched a rapid counterattack in the precious last few minutes the country still existed, instead of seeking Congressional approval.
But the Americans discussing abandoning their ‘no strike first’ policy, removing this power from the presidency is a small price to pay for increased global security.
It’s also similar to a proposal in Britain to strip the Prime Minister of the right to start a war without the consent of parliament. This is precisely what Blair and his cronies did when they joined Bush in the invasion of Iraq. Looking through Waterstone’s shelves the other month, I saw a book by a British general arguing against the proposal, on the grounds that it would hinder Britain’s ability to wage war.
A fair reply to this argument would be ‘Good.’
The Iraq invasion was an illegal act of aggression, launched on a tissue of lies that Saddam Hussein was planning another attack, and had weapons of mass destruction. He wasn’t and didn’t. The result has been the destruction of one of the richest, most secular nations in the Middle East, the devastation of its priceless antiquities, and millions dead, wounded and displaced not only in Iraq itself but across the Middle East.
It plunged the country into a vicious, sectarian civil war, in which the American occupying forces gave material aid and sanction to Shia death squads, while the mercenaries employed by the West ran completely out of control. These private military contractors were responsible for prostitution to murder, sometimes just killing ordinary Iraqis and Arabs just for kicks.
There is a very strong case for hauling Blair, Bush and the other warmongers up before the Hague as war criminals. This has been tried by British, Canadian and Greek lawyers, but American pressure on the Hague War Crimes Tribunal put a stop to it. And a few weeks ago a British court also ruled that Blair could not be indicted as the war criminal he is.
Considering the horror Blair unleashed through his decision to go to war, against the wishes of over a million ordinary Brits, who marched against it – Christian, Muslim, atheist, whatever, then it’s only too right that the Prime Minister should have to call parliament before they declare war.
Tags: 'Diceman', American Presidency, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Christianity, Congress, Death Squads, Democrat Party, Demonstrations, Donald Trump, George Dubya, International War Crimes Tribunal, Iraq Invasion, Iraq War, Kim Jong Un, Mark Lew, Mercenaries, Middle East, Murder, Nuclear Missiles, Nuclear War, Pat Mills, Private Military Contractors, Prostitution, Role-Playing Games, Ronald Reagan, Saddam Hussein, Shi'a, Soviet Union, the Courts, The Hague, The Observer, The Ring Of Fire, tony blair, War, Weapons of Mass Destruction
August 13, 2017 at 5:55 pm |
Reblogged this on idontbelieveitagain and commented:
So Tony Blair can not be indicted in the U.K.?
August 14, 2017 at 8:28 am |
Hi Lawrence! Yes, that’s the impression I had. There really isn’t any justice for the powerful and corrupt.
August 13, 2017 at 8:25 pm |
Reblogged this on vondreassen.
August 13, 2017 at 9:56 pm |
Hi BeastI hope you are OK, I have trapped nerve at the moment, still waiting for the painkillers to kick in!
As for your article Excellent as always!
I don’t think Putin is that short sighted, he loves power, if we had WW3 then his power and maybe his life would be gone, don’t get me wrong he is more evil than “The Fart” but being so evil he is intelligent and knows what the consequences of his actions would be.
Trump on the other hand is hot air that gives so many people indigestion, like his name!
I don’t think Putin would ever take Trump seriously, and although Trump is an idiot and a psychopath, he does also worry about self-preservation like the coward he is!
August 14, 2017 at 8:27 am |
Good to hear from you again, Joanna, though I’m sorry you’ve got a trapped nerve. Ouch! I had a touch a sciatica myself two years ago, and that was absolute murder. So, you definitely have my sympathies.
I don’t think Putin is the problem here, for the reasons you’ve outlined. It’s Trump, and his equally belligerent North Korean counterpart, Kim Jong Un. We can’t do much about the Korean dictator, but we can do something about Trump as we still live in a democratic society, despite his efforts and those of May and the big corporations to undermine it.