5 Nobel Prize Laureates Appeal Against Using Nukes on Iran
CASMII | 08.05.2006 16:14
A copy of the letter written to George Bush by 13 eminent physicists will be deliver to Tony Blair by the CASMII delegation to Downing St.
Dear Mr. President:
Recent articles in the New Yorker and Washington Post report that the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran is being actively considered by Pentagon planners and by the White House. As members of the profession that brought nuclear weapons into
existence, we urge you to refrain from such an action that would have grave consequences for America and for the world.
1800 of our fellow physicists have joined in a petition opposing new US nuclear weapons policies that open the door to the use of nuclear weapons in situations such as Iran's. These policies represent a "radical departure from the past", in the words of Linton
Brooks, National Nuclear Security Administration director. Indeed, since the end of World War II, US policy has considered nuclear weapons "weapons of last resort", to be used only when the very survival of the nation or of an allied nation was at stake, or at
most in cases of extreme military necessity. Instead, the new US nuclear weapons policies have significantly lowered the threshold for the potential use of nuclear weapons, as clearly evidenced by the fact that they are being considered as another tool in the
toolbox to destroy underground installations that are "too deep" to be destroyed by conventional weapons. This is a major and dangerous shift in the rationale for nuclear weapons. In the words of the late Joseph Rotblat, Nobel Peace Prize recipient for his
efforts to prevent nuclear war, "the danger of this policy can hardly be over-emphasized". Nuclear weapons are unique among weapons of mass destruction: they unleash the enormous energy stored in the tiny nucleus of an atom, an energy that is a million times
larger than that stored in the rest of the atom. The nuclear explosion releases an immense amount of blast energy and thermal and nuclear radiation, with deadly immediate and
delayed effects on the human body. Over 100,000 human beings died in the Hiroshima blast, and nuclear weapons in today's arsenals have a total yield of over 200,000 Hiroshima bombs.
Using or even merely threatening to use a nuclear weapon preemptively against a nonnuclear adversary tells the 182 non-nuclear-weapon countries signatories of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty that their adherence to the treaty offers them no protection against a nuclear attack by a nuclear nation. Many are thus likely to abandon the treaty, and the nuclear non-proliferation framework will be damaged even further than it already has, with disastrous consequences for the security of the United States and the world.
There are no sharp lines between small "tactical" nuclear weapons and large ones, nor between nuclear weapons targeting facilities and those targeting armies or cities. Nuclear weapons have not been used for 60 years. Once the US uses a nuclear weapon again, it will heighten the probability that others will too. In a world with many more nuclear nations and no longer a "taboo" against the use of nuclear weapons, there will be a greatly enhanced risk that regional conflicts could expand into global nuclear war, with the potential to destroy our civilization. It is gravely irresponsible for the U.S. as the greatest superpower to consider courses of
action that could eventually lead to the widespread destruction of life on the planet.
We urge you to announce publicly that the U.S. is taking the nuclear option off the table in the case of all nonnuclear adversaries, present or future, and we urge the American people to make their voices heard on this matter.
Sincerely,
Philip Anderson, Michael Fisher, David Gross, Jorge Hirsch, Leo Kadanoff, Joel Lebowitz, Anthony Leggett, Eugen Merzbacher, Douglas Osheroff, Andrew Sessler
George Trilling, Frank Wilczek, Edward Witten
Recent articles in the New Yorker and Washington Post report that the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran is being actively considered by Pentagon planners and by the White House. As members of the profession that brought nuclear weapons into
existence, we urge you to refrain from such an action that would have grave consequences for America and for the world.
1800 of our fellow physicists have joined in a petition opposing new US nuclear weapons policies that open the door to the use of nuclear weapons in situations such as Iran's. These policies represent a "radical departure from the past", in the words of Linton
Brooks, National Nuclear Security Administration director. Indeed, since the end of World War II, US policy has considered nuclear weapons "weapons of last resort", to be used only when the very survival of the nation or of an allied nation was at stake, or at
most in cases of extreme military necessity. Instead, the new US nuclear weapons policies have significantly lowered the threshold for the potential use of nuclear weapons, as clearly evidenced by the fact that they are being considered as another tool in the
toolbox to destroy underground installations that are "too deep" to be destroyed by conventional weapons. This is a major and dangerous shift in the rationale for nuclear weapons. In the words of the late Joseph Rotblat, Nobel Peace Prize recipient for his
efforts to prevent nuclear war, "the danger of this policy can hardly be over-emphasized". Nuclear weapons are unique among weapons of mass destruction: they unleash the enormous energy stored in the tiny nucleus of an atom, an energy that is a million times
larger than that stored in the rest of the atom. The nuclear explosion releases an immense amount of blast energy and thermal and nuclear radiation, with deadly immediate and
delayed effects on the human body. Over 100,000 human beings died in the Hiroshima blast, and nuclear weapons in today's arsenals have a total yield of over 200,000 Hiroshima bombs.
Using or even merely threatening to use a nuclear weapon preemptively against a nonnuclear adversary tells the 182 non-nuclear-weapon countries signatories of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty that their adherence to the treaty offers them no protection against a nuclear attack by a nuclear nation. Many are thus likely to abandon the treaty, and the nuclear non-proliferation framework will be damaged even further than it already has, with disastrous consequences for the security of the United States and the world.
There are no sharp lines between small "tactical" nuclear weapons and large ones, nor between nuclear weapons targeting facilities and those targeting armies or cities. Nuclear weapons have not been used for 60 years. Once the US uses a nuclear weapon again, it will heighten the probability that others will too. In a world with many more nuclear nations and no longer a "taboo" against the use of nuclear weapons, there will be a greatly enhanced risk that regional conflicts could expand into global nuclear war, with the potential to destroy our civilization. It is gravely irresponsible for the U.S. as the greatest superpower to consider courses of
action that could eventually lead to the widespread destruction of life on the planet.
We urge you to announce publicly that the U.S. is taking the nuclear option off the table in the case of all nonnuclear adversaries, present or future, and we urge the American people to make their voices heard on this matter.
Sincerely,
Philip Anderson, Michael Fisher, David Gross, Jorge Hirsch, Leo Kadanoff, Joel Lebowitz, Anthony Leggett, Eugen Merzbacher, Douglas Osheroff, Andrew Sessler
George Trilling, Frank Wilczek, Edward Witten
CASMII
Homepage:
http://www.campaigniran.org
Comments
Hide the following comment
Yes, let's tell the bad man that he is bad- what a winning strategy
08.05.2006 20:13
Like me try to understand your logic. If one finds a serial rapist, one should present such a person with a statement saying that rape isn't very nice. I think that just about sums your position up. Funny, the rest of us think that the rapist should be arrested and tried for his crimes.
A lot of people are working very hard to say that Blair SHOULD NOT be held accountable for his crimes, but instead treated as someone who has 'accidently' invaded Iraq, 'accidently' supported the most extreme right-wing government in US history, and 'accidently' plans to genocide Iran.
Now forgive me for saying that this sounds EXACTLY like BUYING ENOUGH TIME FOR BLAIR TO COMPLETE THE FINAL STAGES OF HIS WAR PLANS.
Are there people engaged in such efforts? Well the answer is obviously yes, since Blair spends billions on departments tasked with exactly this behaviour. Of course, Blair's people prefer to recruit 'useful idiots' to work on their behalf. Such 'useful idiots' are most certainly well-meaning, but are easily manipulated by alpha-personalities. Think cult leader, and cult followers. The cult leader, no matter who outrageous his ideas, is a charismatic alpha who persuades many simple-minded humans to follow his orders.
The idea that telling Blair what a bad chap he is will serve some purpose will have come from one of Blair's embedded agents (the very fact that Blair's people propose useless activities against him make them easy to identify). Likewise, Blair's agents will shoot down any and all proposals for effective action. This may be achieved by 'inner-circle' politics within the group (CASMII in this case), or by the 'personality-clash' method where 'dangerous' people are driven out by seemingly unrelated person-to-person issues.
Only when an organisation like CASMII is actively removing Blair's people as quickly as they are inserted can there be any chance of it having any success. Forlorn hope really, for the Iranian government is in way too deep with Blair, making his job childishly easy.
Now HERE is a letter CASMII should be sending to Blair-
"we, the undersigned, have each promised to work to the best of our abilities to bring Tony Blair, and those that have worked with him, to trial for his CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. It is our intent to see that Blair answers for his crimes at a hearing that will be this generations Nuremberg, fully exposing once again the evil of those, like Blair and Bush, that have waged AGGRESSIVE WARFARE, previously established at Nuremberg as the supreme WAR CRIME. We fully expect Blair, Bush, and others to suffer the same fate as those convicted at Nuremberg, and with their just punishment return to the Earth the possibility of justice and safety for all peoples.
We understand that if we fail in our aims, Blair will be free to complete his plans to launch a genocidal attack against Iran, and trigger his real plan, a World War culminating with full blown war with China, just as Hitler before him manipulated the events of WW2 in order to ready for war with the USSR."
Of course, given that CASMII represents Iranian interests, they will find themselves less than enthusiastic about my approach, understanding that Iran was Blair's partner in the invasion of both Afghanistan and Iraq. Blair knows that Iran will find it difficult to resist the consequences of having blood on its hands, an ancient human story from way before the time of Shakespeare. Iran chose to dance with the Devil. They will spend an eternity regretting that.
twilight