Welcome
Welcome to poundhillnorthindependentcrawley

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free,

So please Before registering we would like you to choose a user name that has some sort of meaning as any type of spam/Bot user name will be deleted

Contact the forums administrator and Registering is very straight forward you just click on the register link above and follow the direction's. For those of you who have registered you just need to log in

Please note that you will need to enter a valid e-mail address before your account is activated. You will receive an e-mail at the address you provide that contains an account activation link.

SCRAM CAMPAIGN FOR NUCLEAR FREE ZONES

SCRAM CAMPAIGN FOR NUCLEAR FREE ZONES

Postby RichardWSymonds » Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:40 pm

[flash=][/flash]SCRAM CAMPAIGN AGAINST COERCIVE USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS - AFTER HIROSHIMA & NAGASAKI VIGILS (& PETITION) IN CRAWLEY - AUGUST 6TH, 9TH & 29TH 2012
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=663&start=30
Last edited by RichardWSymonds on Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:09 pm, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

 

Re: SCRAM Campaign After Hiroshima & Nagasaki Vigils In Craw

Postby RichardWSymonds » Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:46 pm

http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/news/c ... -1-4223310

COLUMN by Leader of Crawley Borough Council, Cllr Bob lanzer :
A good case for continuing to campaign against the proliferation of nuclear weapons
CRAWLEY OBSERVER
Published on Wednesday 5 September 2012 10:44


Over the summer, there were a number of vigils, including in Crawley, to remember the huge destruction and loss of life caused by the only two atomic bombs dropped in anger on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was also timely to consider the grave threats posed by existing nuclear weapon stockpiles, some of them increasing in size.

We are supposed to learn from our history but such analysis can sometimes be harsh on key decision-makers from the past, who are credited with the mistakes that we now seek to avoid. Without actually having been there, it is difficult to have a total knowledge of the considerations that motivated the use of two atomic bombs on Japan, but we can attempt a balanced analysis. An alternative to the atomic bombs was Operation Downfall, the intended full-scale invasion of Japan, which had various casualty estimates in the millions for both sides.

There was also the option of an armistice or negotiated peace but the Allies, through the United Nations, had already demanded an unconditional surrender. They knew that the German armistice in Word War I had allowed that country to claim that it had never been defeated. This fact was exploited by militarists and nationalists, and probably contributed in a major way to World War II.

A further route could have been a demonstration of the atomic bomb to the Japanese. This is a great historical “What if?” Would a test use of this weapon have brought about an unconditional surrender or would it have moderated this condition, leading to an armistice, with the problems associated with that outcome?

The central point is that choices were being made by leaders whose people were scarred and drained by almost six years of high-technology warfare, with an appalling casualty list. That was a decision-making environment which can never be simulated or role-played.

None of this detracts from raising awareness today of the continued threat posed by nuclear weapons and their proliferation. They are not that easy to produce. It took Britain more than seven years after the United States to build its own, despite a strong technological base.

There is a difference today though, in that whereas nuclear weapons were only held by countries with elaborate decision-making processes and fail-safe mechanisms, today there is the possibility of nuclear weapons being acquired by other forces without these reassurances. It was also the case that leaders in the Cold War period on both sides would possess a certain degree of rationality, in that they would wish to preserve themselves and their people. They were not minded to be suicidal.

So many of these parameters have now changed. This alone makes the case for continuing to campaign against the proliferation of nuclear weapons and any suggestion of their coercive use.
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons

Postby RichardWSymonds » Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:27 pm

THIS LETTER HAS APPEARED IN THE CRAWLEY OBSERVER - "NUCLEAR CAMPAIGN" (Sept 12 2012)

Dear Editor

Following the Hiroshima & Nagasaki Vigils last month (August 6th, 9th &
29th) - and a Statement from Crawley Borough Council Leader Bob Lanzer
(September 6) - a campaign has been established to counter the
dangerous, threatening and coercive use of language by certain nuclear powers.


Yours sincerely


Richard W. Symonds
SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons


viewtopic.php?f=41&t=746
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons

Postby RichardWSymonds » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:04 pm

"THE INSANITY CLUB FOR THE INSANE"

MEMBER : MARTIN INDYK (FORMER US AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL)


"Former US Envoy Predicts 2013 War With Iran"

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/17/form ... with-iran/
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons

Postby RichardWSymonds » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:17 pm

WAR-MONGERS & WAR-FINANCIERS - "TWIN DEMONS"
http://lewrockwell.com/rockwell/twin-demons-198.html (Hat-Tip : Paul)

Twin Demons
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

It isn’t terribly often that people discuss the development of total war in tandem with the development of modern central banking, which – although antecedents existed long before – also came into its own in the twentieth century. It’s no surprise that Ron Paul, the man in public life who has done more than anyone to break through the limits of what is permissible to say in polite society about both these things, has also been so insistent that the twin phenomena of war and central banking are linked. "It is no coincidence," Dr. Paul said, "that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking."

"...The war machine and the money machine, in short, are intimately linked.

"It is vain to denounce the moral grotesqueries of the U.S. empire without at the same time taking aim at the indispensable support that makes it all possible. If we wish to oppose the state and all its manifestations – its imperial adventures, its domestic subsidies, its unstoppable spending and debt accumulation – we must point to their source, the central bank, the mechanism that the state and its kept media and economists will defend to their dying days.

The state has persuaded the people that its own interests are identical with theirs. It seeks to promote their welfare. Its wars are their wars. It is the great benefactor, and the people are to be content in their role as its contented subjects.

Ours is a different view. The state’s relationship to the people is not benign, it is not one of magnanimous giver and grateful recipient. It is an exploitative relationship, whereby an array of self-perpetuating fiefdoms that produce nothing live at the expense of the toiling majority. Its wars do not protect the public; they fleece it. Its subsidies do not promote the so-called public good; they undermine it. Why should we expect its production of money to be an exception to this general pattern?
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons

Postby RichardWSymonds » Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:07 pm

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/20/isra ... st-futile/ (Hat-Tip : Paul)

Israel: Calls for Nuclear-Free Middle East ‘Futile’

Undecided on Attending Conference Pushed by Russia
by Jason Ditz, September 20, 2012
Print This | Share This

With Russian officials urging the IAEA to host a conference on a nuclear-free Middle East, Israel’s atomic energy chief Shaul Horev has rejected the idea as unrealistic and “futile.” Foreign Ministry officials declined to say if Israel would even participate if such a summit was held.

“Regrettably, the realities in the Middle East are far from being conducive,” said Horev, adding that the “concept of a region free of weapons of mass destruction” was not “applicable” to the Middle East. Israel is the only nation in the region with nuclear weapons.

The idea of a nuclear-free Middle East has been kicked around for years, but gained a major boost when the US endorsed the idea in 2010 at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) conference. Having endorsed the plan, it took less than 24 hours for the US State Department to express “deep regrets” over the signing, saying it was unfair. President Obama followed up by calling the signing a mistake and insisted Israel has a “right” to nuclear weapons.

Polls have consistently shown strong support among Israelis for a nuclear-free zone in the region, but the hawkish government in power in Israel has blasted every proposal to even discuss the subject, saying it “unfairly singles out” Israel by virtue of the fact that Israel is the only nation with a nuclear weapons program in the first place, as well as the only non-signatory to the NPT in the region.
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM CAMPAIGN AGAINST COERCIVE INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES

Postby RichardWSymonds » Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:19 am

SCRAM CAMPAIGN FOR CREATIVE NON-VIOLENT CONFLICT RESOLUTION

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=857
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM CAMPAIGN AGAINST COERCIVE CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Postby RichardWSymonds » Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:57 pm

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/22-2 (Hat-Tip : Paul)

Published on Saturday, September 22, 2012 by Eric Margolis

Romney and the Neocons Court Nuclear Disaster

Chinese and Japanese vessels prowl menacingly in the sea around the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands as Beijing and Tokyo exchange threats.

A few wrong moves could spark a clash between China and Japan that would likely draw in Tokyo’s ally, the United States, which, under a 1960 defense treaty, is bound to defend Japan if it is attacked.

Half way around the globe, powerful US naval forces are cruising the Gulf and Arabian Sea to intimidate Iran. A clash between US and Iranian naval units or aircraft in the Gulf seems increasingly likely as heated rhetoric on both sides increases.

Meanwhile, Israel’s rightist prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, keeps threatening to attack Iran, with or without US assistance.

No one can accuse him of being a flip-flopper like his ally and admirer, Mitt Romney.

Twenty years ago, in 1992, Netanyahu declared Iran would deploy nuclear weapons in 3-5 years. In 1995, Israeli officials warned Iran would have nuclear arms by 2000. In 1998, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld warned that Iran would have intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads by 2003 that could strike the United States. Netanyahu now insists Iran will have nukes within a year. US intelligence denies this claim. Even biased UN nuclear inspectors say Iran has no nukes.

Even so, hysteria and disinformation about Iran’s nuclear program continues without relent, intensifying war fever in America which is in the midst of election fever.

Last week, a secretly taped video emerged of candidate Romney talking to a $50,000 a plate lunch for pro-Israel supporters in Boca Raton, Florida. Romney told the audience he could not support a Palestinian state and would stall this burning issue indefinitely. Romney called Iran’s leaders “crazy.” Publicly, Romney advocated a two-state solution and creation of a Palestinian state.

Shortly before, Romney asserted at another private fundraiser that 47% of Americans paid no taxes, were freeloaders, and thus naturally supported President Barack Obama. Romney’s remark sparked outrage, coming from a multi-millionaire who never seems to have paid more than 15% taxes thanks to a shady scheme of converting corporate profits into lower-taxed dividends.

Too many Americans pay no taxes, it is true, and too many are on the dole, from 44 million people who use food stamps to America’s industrial farmers. But Romney’s comments were certain to be taken amiss, and they were.

While Romney was floundering, rightwing Republicans were on the war path after the killing of the US ambassador to Libya – which looked to this old Libya hand like payback for the US-assisted killing of Muammar Gadaffi.

Republican hawks demanded Obama “take action” and “get tough” with the troublesome Muslim world. Alas for those howling for revenge, the killers of the ambassador remained for now unidentified.

So what targets were left for the enraged Republican sofa samurais? Bomb Tripoli or Cairo? Bomb Mecca, as some far right crazies have long urged? Former president George W. Bush was a great one for “taking action.” The result: the disasters in Afghanistan and Iraq, the wrecking of America’s once vibrant economy, and over $1 trillion in debt to finance these lost wars.

Independent voters, who will probably decide the November election, are better educated and more worldly than the core Republican blue collar and Bible Belt voters. Many were aghast at Romney’s calls for more war, his painful ignorance of foreign affairs, and close identification with far right policies.

Barack Obama may have achieved very little in his foreign policy, but a President Romney looks like he might be a disaster – a sort of George W. Bush on steroids. In fact, Romney is surrounded by the same cast of far right, neoconservative nut cases that misled the foolish Bush into wars.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu is lambasting Obama and getting away with it, backed by Republicans and neocons. The danger here is that Israel’s leader might conclude having tied Obama’s hands he can go ahead and use tactical nuclear weapons to destroy Iran’s underground nuclear facilities.

The very idea of Israel or Iran attacking one another’s nuclear plants is madness. The result would be a global radioactive catastrophe, particularly so for the Gulf states. The world has so far ignored this danger.

By encouraging Israel’s far right to threaten Iran with war, Romney is being irresponsible and reckless. He is showing that he is not ready for the presidency, never mind global leadership. He could end up being as big a disaster for Israel as for the United States.

President Obama has been a profound disappointment to those who hoped he would end America’s militarized foreign policy and the Bush era’s violation of rights. However, the blundering, ill-educated Romney now makes Obama look wise and saintly.

© 2012 Eric Margolis

Columnist and author Eric Margolis is a veteran of many conflicts in the Middle East, Margolis recently was featured in a special appearance on Britain’s Sky News TV as “the man who got it right” in his predictions about the dangerous risks and entanglements the US would face in Iraq. His latest book is American Raj: Liberation or Domination?: Resolving the Conflict Between the West and the Muslim World
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: SCRAM Campaign After Hiroshima & Nagasaki Vigils In Craw

Postby RichardWSymonds » Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:00 pm

RichardWSymonds wrote:http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/news/columnists/column-by-leader-of-crawley-borough-council-cllr-bob-lanzer-a-good-case-for-continuing-to-campaign-against-the-proliferation-of-nuclear-weapons-1-4223310

COLUMN by Leader of Crawley Borough Council, Cllr Bob lanzer :
A good case for continuing to campaign against the proliferation of nuclear weapons
CRAWLEY OBSERVER
Published on Wednesday 5 September 2012 10:44


Over the summer, there were a number of vigils, including in Crawley, to remember the huge destruction and loss of life caused by the only two atomic bombs dropped in anger on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was also timely to consider the grave threats posed by existing nuclear weapon stockpiles, some of them increasing in size.

We are supposed to learn from our history but such analysis can sometimes be harsh on key decision-makers from the past, who are credited with the mistakes that we now seek to avoid. Without actually having been there, it is difficult to have a total knowledge of the considerations that motivated the use of two atomic bombs on Japan, but we can attempt a balanced analysis. An alternative to the atomic bombs was Operation Downfall, the intended full-scale invasion of Japan, which had various casualty estimates in the millions for both sides.

There was also the option of an armistice or negotiated peace but the Allies, through the United Nations, had already demanded an unconditional surrender. They knew that the German armistice in Word War I had allowed that country to claim that it had never been defeated. This fact was exploited by militarists and nationalists, and probably contributed in a major way to World War II.

A further route could have been a demonstration of the atomic bomb to the Japanese. This is a great historical “What if?” Would a test use of this weapon have brought about an unconditional surrender or would it have moderated this condition, leading to an armistice, with the problems associated with that outcome?

The central point is that choices were being made by leaders whose people were scarred and drained by almost six years of high-technology warfare, with an appalling casualty list. That was a decision-making environment which can never be simulated or role-played.

None of this detracts from raising awareness today of the continued threat posed by nuclear weapons and their proliferation. They are not that easy to produce. It took Britain more than seven years after the United States to build its own, despite a strong technological base.

There is a difference today though, in that whereas nuclear weapons were only held by countries with elaborate decision-making processes and fail-safe mechanisms, today there is the possibility of nuclear weapons being acquired by other forces without these reassurances. It was also the case that leaders in the Cold War period on both sides would possess a certain degree of rationality, in that they would wish to preserve themselves and their people. They were not minded to be suicidal.

So many of these parameters have now changed. This alone makes the case for continuing to campaign against the proliferation of nuclear weapons and any suggestion of their coercive use.
User avatar
RichardWSymonds
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18926
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:19 pm


Return to SCRAM Campaign Against Coercive Use Of Nuclear Weapons



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred