Pages

Monday, June 19, 2023

Fire God given nuclear weapons to save the world says Russian

Whilst recognising the bias in articles published by Russia Today - all capitalist/state capitalist media is biased no matter where it emanates from – the extracts below are from a piece detailing a debate that occurred between five Russians in reponse to an article by Professor Sergey Karaganov, honorary chairman of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and academic supervisor at the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs Higher School of Economics (HSE) in Moscow. Karaganov, suggests that Russia should fire nuclear weapons at Western targets so that “By breaking the West’s will in imposing its aggression, we will not only save ourselves and finally free the world from the Western yoke of five centuries, but we will also salvage the whole of humanity. By pushing the West towards catharsis and the abandonment of the hegemony of its elites, we will force it to retreat before a global catastrophe. Humanity will be given a new chance to develop.”

“But what if the present Western leaders refuse to back down? Perhaps they have lost all sense of self-preservation? Then we will have to hit a group of targets in a number of countries to bring those who have lost their senses back to their senses.”

Demonstrating that neo-con evangelists and “leaders” of competing capitalist systems in America and elsewhere are not the only scarily insane ones whose irrational beliefs constitute a threat to the safety of all in the world, Karaganov invokes the ‘God’s on our side’ argument. A fan of Bob Dylan perhaps? Although in that song the sky dweller was supposed to be instrumental in preventing Armageddon. Those who subscribe to Historical Materialism would rather put heir faith -pun intended - in socialist minded human beings to prevent such catastrophes.

I have spent many years studying the history of nuclear strategy and have come to an unequivocal, if unscientific, conclusion. The advent of nuclear weapons is the result of the intervention of the Almighty, who, appalled that mankind had unleashed two world wars within a generation, costing tens of millions of lives, gave us the weapons of Armageddon to show those who had lost their fear of hell that it existed. On that fear rested the relative peace of the last three-quarters of a century.”

It’s a morally frightening choice – we would be using God’s weapon and condemning ourselves to great spiritual loss. But if this is not done, not only may Russia perish, but most likely the whole of humn an civilization will end. “

RT 14/6/23

https://www.rt.com/russia/578042-russia-nuclear-weapons/

From the debate:

Elena Panina, former State Duma deputy and director of the Institute of International Political and Economic Strategies:

“Sergey Karaganov’s article suggesting Russia should preemptively use nuclear weapons is intended to finally draw “red lines” so that the West gets scared and retreats. However, it looks like an extremely strange gambit, even beyond the provocative overtones. Nuclear war as a remedy for a global catastrophe is as helpful as a guillotine for a headache. (Our emphasis)

It is nuclear war that we are talking about, though in Karaganov’s article the term is replaced by the more streamlined formula “use of nuclear weapons.” Is there a line before which “use of nuclear weapons” is not nuclear war, and after which it is?

Is it not clear that the first use of nuclear weapons will immediately trigger a retaliation of much greater force?

Nuclear weapons are the last resort on the chessboard. When all other means have been exhausted, all resources expended, and defeat is inevitable. And even then, nuclear weapons can no longer be used to checkmate the enemy, but instead to overturn the tables and blow up the room. They do not let the enemy win by destroying it along with planet Earth.Police officers and criminals both know the rule: don’t show your gun unless you intend to use it. Don’t scare your opponent with it, because they might hit you or shoot you first. That’s why immature minds are not advised to carry guns – they don’t control the guns, the guns control them. It is a good thing that Mr Karaganov, who advises the use of nuclear weapons to scare the West, is not allowed to use them. And those who are allowed to have iron self-control and will not listen to such advice. 

Political scientist Ilya Grashchenkov, President of the Center for Regional Policy Development:

“Karaganov’s article is interesting because it shines a light on the impasse in which we find ourselves. Without reflecting on why this has happened, he suggests a simple solution: “It is necessary to scare the West into retreating and getting out of the way. To do this, we must strike. Somewhere. It’s not yet clear where.”

“It is a morally frightening choice – we use God’s weapon and condemn ourselves to a severe spiritual dilemma. But if we do not, not only will Russia perish, but all human civilization will probably come to an end,” is the conclusion Karaganov draws for some reason...

In fact, Karaganov’s article is similar to the line of thought of [ex-Preident Dmitry] Medvedev’s, but more serious. It is also in the schoolboy logic of “hitting first” and thereby beating the opponent in a berserk frenzy. Which is kind of frightening.

On the other hand, if you talk about something for a very long time, you begin to perceive the idea not as insane but as quite acceptable. Thus extending the boundaries of what is possible, first in your own mind and then in reality. So, what goes on in the heads of those who write about “God’s weapon” (though personally I am not sure that God has any weapon at all and apparently they have their own Saviour),- thinking of Joseph Stalin’s WW2 response when warned to be mindful of the Vatican; How many divisions does the Pope have? - is difficult to analyze and predict. Great Chinese prose compares such thoughts to “the dream of a severed head,” whose thoughts brew in a highly autonomous manner and are almost not subject to external comprehension. I would suggest that someone is trying to plant their fear in the West, fear as a new doctrine. We are the fearful!

To simplify the content of the article, it says that a “small scale” nuclear war is not that scary. And since we have nothing else, it means we have no choice – we must strike at Western Europe and then “in a few years take a stand behind China’s back, just as it is now behind ours, supporting it in its tussle with the US. For some reason, Karaganov seems to think that such an outcome is an outright blessing and a sign of prosperity, though one might perceive that such a position of battering ram and satellite of China looks rather humiliating.”

RT 17/6/23

https://www.rt.com/russia/578218-experts-respond-to-call-for-atomic-strike/


No comments:

Post a Comment