Tag: perpetual war

On July 4, 1945: The Man Who Tried To Halt the Atomic Bombings

On July 4, 1945, the great atomic scientist Leo Szilard finished a letter that would become the strongest (and one of the very few) real attempts at halting President Truman’s march to using the atomic bomb – which was two weeks from its first test at Trinity – against Japanese cities.

It’s well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”

The following day, July 4, he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The FBI was already following Szilard. The bomb would be dropped over Hiroshima on August 6.

July 4, 1945

Dear _______________

Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.

It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan.

Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.

However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.

Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.

The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.

Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.

Leo Szilard

What happened next? Well, the petition gained from than 180 signatures—Oppenheimer obviously not one, and actively discouraged others – but was then delayed in getting to President Truman by Gen. Leslie Groves, military head of the Manhattan Project, until the A-bombs were ready to use, in early August. Groves also commissioned a poll of atomic scientists, which found that over 80% favored a demonstration shot only – so he squelched that, too. Much more in my 2020 book: The Beginning or the End: How Hollywood – and America – Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.

Keep reading

Independence From Empire Day 2025

We are independent of London, but are we independent of Washington? Is there more freedom when governed by one tyrant 3,000 miles away or by 3,000 tyrants a few miles away?
Does government today remotely resemble the values articulated on July 4th 1776?

When the president of the United States bombs the lawful facilities of a foreign country that pose no threat whatsoever to American national security and does so without a congressional declaration of war as the Constitution requires; when thousands of non-violent folks in America are arrested by masked federal agents without warrants and kicked out of the country without due process; when troops patrol the streets of a large city in defiance of federal law; when both major political parties support mass surveillance, undeclared foreign wars and borrowing trillions of dollars a year to fund a bloated government — nearly all of which is nowhere countenanced by the Constitution — we can safely conclude that personal liberty in our once-free society has been radically diminished and is in the twilight of its existence.

Two hundred and forty-nine years ago this week, Thomas Jefferson was fuming in his rented rooms in Philadelphia as the Continental Congress was softening the tone of his final draft of what would become the most critical document and radical articulation of the origins of human freedom in American history. [Read Jefferson’s first draft.]

The Declaration of Independence is an indictment of King George III as well as a manifestation of limited government and maximum individual freedom.

Though the final version dropped some of Jefferson’s more bellicose language, the document as we know it is largely his — not only his lofty language but also the three principal Jeffersonian values that it manifests.

Keep reading

Kyiv On Fire As Russian Pummels Ukrainian Capital

Russian missiles and drones are attacking the capital of Ukraine – Kyiv.

Kyiv International Airport is apparently one of the main targets. Ukrainian air defense assets have been known to be located at the airport.

The attacks come after the phone call today between Russian President Putin and President Trump. POTUS said he was not happy after the call.

It looks like Moscow has decided to push for complete destruction of Ukraine’s military capability to resist, prior to suing for peace. This decision may be based on the Ukrainian destruction of Russian strategic nuclear aircraft just weeks ago.

Keep reading

Deputy Head Of Russian Navy Killed In Ukraine Missile Strike

In a rare battlefield development, a very high-ranking general officer for Russia’s military has been killed by Ukrainian forces, and it actually happened on Russian soil.

Major General Mikhail Gudkov, deputy commander of the Russian Navy and a brigade leader in the Ukraine war, has been confirmed dead in Russia’s Kursk region, according to a statement Thursday by a Kremlin official.

The news broke when Russian and Ukrainian military Telegram channels reported that Gudkov was killed along with 10 other soldiers in a Ukrainian strike targeting a command post in Korenevo, which lies near the Ukrainian border.

Gudkov is among the highest-ranking Russian military figures killed by Ukrainian forces since the conflict began. A slew of international headlines are reporting his death on Thursday.

Reuters reports the following, citing a Russian regional governor:

Kozhemyako, who said he had spoken to Gudkov a lot over the years, said in a statement that Gudkov had been killed “carrying out his duty as an officer” along with others, and expressed his condolences to the dead men’s relatives.

“When he became Deputy Chief of the Navy, he did not stop personally visiting the positions of our marines,” Kozhemyako said on Telegram.

The 42-year old general had only been promoted by President Putin to the number two command spot over the Navy in late March, according to the Institute for the Study of War think tank.

According to more emerging details in regional media, “An obituary posted by a Russian Navy servicemen’s organization states that on July 2, 2025, the Ukrainian Armed Forces launched a missile strike on the command post of the 155th Marine Brigade.”

Keep reading

Could NATO Burden-Sharing Be a Subtle Snare for the United States?

Both Donald Trump and his legions of critics in Europe are celebrating the outcome of the latest NATO summit.  The centerpiece of NATO’s renewed image of solidarity was an agreement among all Alliance members (except Spain) to boost their annual defense outlays to at least 5 percent of their yearly gross domestic product (GDP).  Although NATO officials portrayed this commitment as a purely voluntary step, it appeased Trump’s long-standing demands for greater financial “burden-sharing” within the Alliance.

Hawks on both sides of the Atlantic may cheer this development, but advocates of a genuine “America first” foreign policy for Washington have little reason to celebrate.  Indeed, more burden-sharing has a disturbing potential to entangle the United States in a growing array of dangerous quarrels between Europe (especially NATO’s East European members) and Russia.  Thus, there could be more Ukraine-style proxy wars in our future.

European leaders apparently were willing to make major concessions to secure America’s continued entanglement in the continent’s security affairs.  They even let Trump take his propaganda victory lap following the U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, despite continued misgivings in some European capitals about the wisdom of his action.  They gave the U.S. leader an even more impressive, albeit implicit, diplomatic victory lap regarding Alliance defense spending.  This theme had dominated Washington’s transatlantic agenda during Trump’s first term, when he pressured the allies to fulfill repeated pledges they had made over the years to spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense.  During the 2024 U.S. presidential campaign, his demand escalated to 5 percent – the same figure that NATO summit leaders have now adopted.

Despite any superficial appearances, the outcome of the June 2025 NATO summit was not good for the American people.  A meaningful debate in the United States on the future of Washington’s transatlantic policy should not focus on the issue of burden-sharing.  America’s principal need is not for more burden-sharing within NATO; our republic needs a strategic divorce from NATO.

Despite hoary propaganda about NATO being an alliance of equals, there was always a yawning gap between that image and the reality of U.S. hegemony.  The United States invariably  called the shots on Alliance policy regarding security issues that U.S. leaders deemed truly important anywhere in the world.

An especially graphic demonstration of how the transatlantic power relationship worked in practice came during the Cuban Missile crisis during the autumn of 1963.  John F. Kennedy’s administration dispatched former ambassador W. Averell Harriman to meet with French President Charles De Gaulle about the alarming situation.  Near the end of the session, De Gaulle asked Harriman if he was consulting with him about U.S. policy or “informing” him.  Harriman conceded that Washington was merely informing its ally. The United States would make the final decision unilaterally, based on America’s best interests.

One consequence of that confirmation of Washington’s dominance within NATO was that France promptly developed and deployed an independent strategic nuclear deterrent and withdrew from NATO’s military structure, thus asserting an independent role for France.

Keep reading

The Real National Emergency: Endless Wars, Failing Infrastructure, and a Dying Republic

Seventy years after President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned about the cost of a military-industrial complex, America is still stealing from its own people to fund a global empire.

In 2025 alone, the U.S. has launched airstrikes in Yemen (Operation Rough Rider), bombed Houthi-controlled ports and radar installations (killing scores of civilians), deployed greater numbers of troops and multiple aircraft carriers to the Middle East, and edged closer to direct war with Iran in support of Israel’s escalating conflict.

Each of these “new” fronts has been sold to the public as national defense. In truth, they are the latest outposts in a decades-long campaign of empire maintenance—one that lines the pockets of defense contractors while schools crumble, bridges collapse, and veterans sleep on the streets at home.

This isn’t about national defense. This is empire maintenance.

It’s about preserving a military-industrial complex that profits from endless war, global policing, and foreign occupations—while the nation’s infrastructure rots and its people are neglected.

The United States has spent much of the past half-century policing the globe, occupying other countries, and waging endless wars.

What most Americans fail to recognize is that these ongoing wars have little to do with keeping the country safe and everything to do with propping up a military-industrial complex that has its sights set on world domination.

War has become a huge money-making venture, and the U.S. government, with its vast military empire, is one of its best buyers and sellers.

Keep reading

Professor Warns UK Gov’t Is Preparing For Civil War, Using Russian Invasion Threat As Cover

A prominent academic in London has warned that the UK government is actively preparing for the break out of a civil war, but is using the “logically absurd” cover of a Russian invasion to put contingencies in place.

Pointing to remarks made in the 2025 National Security Strategy paper last month, Professor David Betz of King’s College London has suggested that the British government is using the phantom threat of a foreign attack in order to harden critical national infrastructure against sabotage.

“For the first time in many years, we have to actively prepare for the possibility of the UK homeland coming under direct threat,” the Whitehall paper noted, adding that “critical national infrastructure – including undersea cables, energy pipelines, transportation and logistics hubs” are a major target.

During a discussion with Professor Lewis Halsey, Professor Betz, a modern war expert recently stated “there is growing apprehension about the security of Britain, the security of its infrastructure specifically, and about the potential for active conflict at home in a very direct manner, effecting people in a very direct manner.”

“But that’s not external in origin, that’s internal, and that has to do with the way our society is now configured, it is highly fractured,” Betz continued, adding “Low trust, highly fractured, and highly politically factionalised which is leading us increasingly inevitably into civil conflict.”

Betz further outlined how the Russian threat is being amplified as a cover story.

“The fact of the matter is there is a great distance between us and Russia… we are not militarily threatened in a direct way on the ground by any obvious external enemy, even Russia,” Betz outlined.

“Which isn’t to say there aren’t things which Russia could do to attack the UK should they wish to, but one of those is not occupying the village green with Russian soldiers, that simply, frankly, is a rather bizarre assertion,” he contended.

“What they’re concerned about is domestic conflict, and they perfectly understand this, but that’s completely politically toxic for them to say so publicly, hence the convenience of saying ‘we need to develop… a citizen’s militia for the protection of critical infrastructure’,” Betz further noted.

“To say that we’re doing this against the potential of Russian attack, which is frankly a logically absurd proposition, but it is convenient as a pretext,” he emphasised.

Keep reading

AIPAC-Funded Reps Put Forward Bill to Transfer American B-2 Bombers and Bunker Busters to Israel

AIPAC-funded congressmen Josh Gottheimer and Mike Lawler have put forward a bill to transfer American B-2 stealth bombers and bunker busters to Israel.

From Fox News, “Trump could arm Israel with US B-2s and bunker busters if Iran tries to go nuclear under new proposal”:

A bipartisan pair of lawmakers has proposed authorizing President Donald Trump to transfer B-2 stealth bombers and 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs to Israel if Iran is found to still be developing a nuclear weapon after last week’s strikes.

Proposed by Reps. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., and Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., the Bunker Buster Act would allow Trump to “take actions to ensure Israel is prepared for all contingencies if Iran seeks to develop a nuclear weapon.”

[…] [Israel] doesn’t possess the 30,000-pound GBU 57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators, precision-guided munition bombs developed for the U.S. Air Force. The 20-foot-long weapons can travel 200 feet deep inside a target before exploding.

As of 2024, the U.S. had 19 B-2s in operation. It does not transfer custody of its B-2 stealth bombers to any of its allies.

Keep reading

MI6 fueled Ukraine proxy war and fabricated intel on Iran – Grayzone investigative journalist

The UK Secret Intelligence Service, commonly known as MI6, has played a central role in spreading false intelligence and engaging in provocative actions aimed at escalating global conflicts, British whistleblower and investigative journalist for The Grayzone, Kit Klarenberg, has told RT.

Speaking to host Rick Sanchez on Thursday, Klarenberg said MI6 was at the forefront of efforts to push the West deeper into the Ukraine conflict.

“I have since the very start of the Ukraine proxy war been reporting on how Britain is leading this effort,” he said, adding that many see MI6 as merely a tool of the CIA, but “no, they go into business for themselves all the time.”

Klarenberg pointed to the 2022 bombing of the Kerch Bridge, which connects Crimea with mainland Russia, claiming it was orchestrated by British operative and NATO adviser Chris Donnelly as part of an effort to pull Washington further into the conflict.

Keep reading

Two Chinese Nationals Arrested, Accused of Espionage Targeting U.S. Navy Personnel

Two individuals believed to be working on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party’s intelligence agency have been arrested by U.S. authorities for allegedly spying on U.S. Navy service members and recruiting military personnel to assist their efforts.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Yuance Chen, residing in Happy Valley, Oregon, and Liren Lai, who entered the country on a tourist visa and was apprehended in Houston, Texas, were taken into custody last Friday. 

Both men face serious charges for acting as agents of China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS)—the country’s primary foreign intelligence service—conducting covert operations across the United States.

According to the DOJ, the pair engaged in a range of clandestine activities, including gathering sensitive information on Navy bases and personnel, facilitating cash payments through “dead drop” techniques and attempting to recruit U.S. Navy members to cooperate with the MSS.

FBI Director Kash Patel emphasized the importance of these arrests in protecting national security.

Keep reading