Menu Close

Tag: Nuclear War

Six Myths About U.S. – North Korea Relations by Joseph Essertier

Bruce Gerencser 1 Comment

north korea

Republished with permission from the author

Not even a year has passed since Donald Trump’s election victory. Yet already, his over-the-top, pugnacious rhetoric and actions have exacerbated Washington’s conflict with North Korea to the point where some observers are comparing it to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.1 But how are people being educated and informed about this crisis in the mass media? We are shown bountiful coverage of North Korean problems, such as Kim Jong-un’s own over-the top rhetoric, his government’s human rights violations, rapid development of nuclear missiles, and soldiers goose stepping, but hardly any coverage of American problems, such as our history of aggression on the Korean Peninsula, the “Military-Industrial Complex” that President Eisenhower warned about in 1961, and the ways in which Washington has been intimidating Pyongyang. Below is an outline of some myths that must be dispelled if Americans are to gain some basic understanding U.S.-North Korea relations today and if they are to feel motivated to pressure their government to negotiate a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

Myth Number 1: North Korea is the aggressor, not us; they are the problem

No. Most serious international relations experts would say that Washington’s past actions have been a major cause of the present crisis, if not the main cause. Yet the impression that many people are naturally left with after watching the news on TV is that North Korea is the problem; their belligerent behavior, especially their constantly conducting missile and nuclear bomb tests, has brought this crisis about. While Washington might not always be portrayed as completely innocent, North Korea is viewed as the main one doing the provoking and escalating the tensions. Let us dispel this myth first.

Undeniably the corporate mass media tend to portray the United States as a cautious and responsible member of the “international community,” and the government of North Korea as the one doing the provoking. But before and during the Korean War that ended in 1953, during the 64 years that have passed since the fighting was temporarily halted, and even during the rising tension during the last year between the United States and North Korea, the U.S. has always been the aggressor. As Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. once stated, the U.S. is the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world.” That was true in his time and it is now. In the case of North Korea, the importance of its governments’ focus on violence is given recognition with the term “garrison state.” This is how Bruce Cumings, the most prominent historian of modern Korea, categorizes it. This term recognizes the fact that the people of North Korea spend a lot of their time preparing for war. That is true. And none of us wish we could live there. But no one calls North Korea the “greatest purveyor of violence.”

Guess which country has engaged in the most overseas wars and invaded the most countries since the Korean War ended: the United States. Guess how many overseas military bases North Korea has: Zero. Guess how many the United States has: Hundreds. Guess how many aircraft carriers North Korea has: Zero. Guess how many nuclear weapons the United States has: Thousands. With just a little thought and study, anyone with Internet or library access can figure out for themselves that there is no question that the U.S. is more powerful, both economically and militarily.

As we seek to understand this reclusive state, let us keep in mind that violence is a weapon of the strong against the weak. It is not a first-choice option for weak states against strong states, just as it is not for women and children trying to solve conflicts with big, strong men. This is not to say that the weaker party never resorts to violence, just that he/she/it will first attempt to solve conflicts non-violently with the stronger party before taking a huge gamble on a probably unsuccessful attempt to physically overpower them.

Let us compare the acts of aggression on the part of Pyongyang with those of Washington. First, I list 10 examples of Washington’s aggression below. Many American readers will be surprised to learn of this violence, both real and symbolic, that has been committed in our name:

1. Contrary to his image as a peace-loving politician, former president Barack Obama promoted nuclear weapons development in a way that has threatened and will continue to threaten all rivals of the U.S., including North Korea, by building America’s “first precision-guided atom bomb,” i.e., a smaller type of nuclear missile that can hit its target extra accurately. Gen. James E. Cartwright, one of Obama’s “most influential nuclear strategists,” favored this investment in American nuclear weapons technology, but even he admitted that “going smaller” makes use of the weapon “more thinkable.” (My italics).

Another investment in a new, dangerous, and geopolitically de-stabilizing nuclear weapons technology, one that few journalists have paid attention to, is a new “super-fuze” device that is being used to upgrade old W76-1/Mk4A thermonuclear warheads and is now probably deployed on all US ballistic missile submarines. It apparently greatly increases the destructive power of nuclear missiles by allowing warheads to detonate above targets at just the right moment. This is outlined in an article that came out earlier this year by the nuclear weapons policy researcher Hans M. Kristensen, the director of the Nuclear Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council Matthew McKinzie, and the physicist and nuclear weapons systems expert at M.I.T. Theodore Postol: “The US submarine force today is much more capable than it was previously against hardened targets such as Russian ICBM silos. A decade ago, only about 20 percent of US submarine warheads had hard-target kill capability; today they all do.” The “nuclear forces modernization program” sponsored by Obama “implemented revolutionary new technologies that will vastly increase the targeting capability of the US ballistic missile arsenal. This increase in capability is astonishing—boosting the overall killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three—and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.” (My italics). This threatens Russia since all their ICBMs could be destroyed, and indirectly it threatens North Korea, since Russia is one country that could conceivably come to its aid in the event of a U.S. invasion.

This is the result of Obama’s spending American tax dollars on a “plan to ‘modernize’ our nuclear arsenal at the unfathomable cost of about $1 trillion over the next 30 years.” During a time when many Americans were tightening their belts, Obama dedicated $1 trillion to technologies that increase the likelihood of nuclear war in general and threaten North Korea and other countries instead of spending that money on relief, education, health care, and other benefits to such Americans. (This will be Obama’s legacy—committing Washington and our economy to nuclear weapons in the years to come. No wonder President Trump is jealous—that his predecessor could do that and come off as a liberal humanitarian). Of course, Russian generals will be aware of these U.S. weapons capabilities, and they will be more likely to keep their “finger on the trigger,” knowing that a U.S. first strike could be so deadly.

2. Last year during the election, even before Donald Trump became president, he made the shocking suggestion that maybe Japan and South Korea should build their own nuclear weapons. Once Donald Trump had won the election, it became more likely that a nuclear arms race would ensue, or be accelerated (unless Obama had already accelerated it). It was not the first time that North Korea would have been concerned about South Korean nuclear weapons development. Under the American-backed dictator Park Chung Hee (1917-1979), Seoul began developing them in the mid- 1970s. The project was supposedly stopped, but South Korea already has conventional long-range missiles today that can hit anywhere in North Korea’s territory, and the conventional warheads on those missiles could easily be refitted with nuclear warheads.

3. In April of this year Washington deployed the THAAD (terminal high area altitude defense) system in spite of intense opposition from South Korean citizens. It is only supposed to intercept North Korean incoming ballistic missiles on their downward descent, but Chinese officials in Beijing worry that the real purpose of THAAD is to “track missiles launched from China” since THAAD has surveillance capabilities. One can say, therefore, that THAAD threatens North Korea directly and indirectly, by threatening an ally of North Korea.

4. Also in April, Washington sent a submarine equipped with nuclear missiles close to the Korean Peninsula on the very day of the celebration of the 85th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Army.

5. North Korea is constantly under threat from the militaries of the U.S., South Korea, and increasingly Japan, through frequent military exercises such as the annual “massive sea, land and air exercises” in South Korea called “Ulchi Freedom Guardian” involving tens of thousands of troops. Not wasting an opportunity to intimidate Pyongyang, these were carried out in 21-31 August 2017 in spite of the rising tension. “Continual economic, propaganda, and psychological warfare” is also conducted against them.

6. In early September 2017 “a provocative idea at a dangerous time,” a new way to threaten North Korea was discussed with the government of South Korea: putting nukes back in South Korea, where Washington had once stockpiled them during the Cold War. Although Washington was not supposed to introduce any qualitatively new weaponry to the Korean Peninsula according to the armistice that Washington signed on 27 July 1953, in 1958 it went ahead and introduced nuclear missiles to the Peninsula. A year later it “permanently stationed a squadron of nuclear- tipped Matador cruise missiles” there. These were aimed not only at North Korea but also at China and the USSR, who were North Korean allies. These and other later-installed nuclear weapons were removed in 1991 because they were obsolete, not because they violated the agreement that Washington had signed. 70 nuclear artillery shells, large numbers of “ADMs” (atomic demolition mines, which were designed to contaminate areas of South Korea in order to stop an armored attack from North Korean forces) and 60 nuclear gravity bombs were among the obsolete weapons that were replaced with more effective, high-yield, conventional weapons.

7. On 11 September 2017 the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2375. This increase in the severity of the ongoing economic sanctions will cause many innocent civilians to freeze to death this winter, without contributing to changes in Pyongyang’s policies and without doing anything to prevent the restart of the Korean War. Washington and Tokyo have tried similar tactics before, such as tying their food aid to politics. Tokyo ended their food aid to “famine-stricken North Korea” in the late 1990s. Between 1995 and 1997 there was a famine in which 2 to 3 million people, out of a population of 23 million, died as a result of food shortages. North Korea is mainly mountainous; there is little quality farmland, so during famines it is difficult to increase food production. The U.S. basically did the same thing. As Bruce Cumings wrote in 1997, “Kim Jong Il’s failed Utopia contains 23 million innocent people who need to be fed” but even American food aid to North Korea was “much too little.” That is the kind of strategy pursued by Washington and Tokyo for helping North Koreans struggle against the dictatorship and build a democratic government. But widespread starvation is not really a common feature of effective democratic movements.

As South Korea’s chief negotiator to the Six Party Talks Chun Youngwoo wrote, “Pressure and sanctions tend to reinforce the regime rather than weaken it.” This is because under pressure and sanctions, North Korea is “besieged, squeezed, strangled and cornered by hostile powers,” and it is precisely under such conditions that militarism thrives and democracy wanes. Try normalizing Pyongyang, and what you will get is the present government being put under the spotlight, where they will be forced to respond to the “demands of their people for improved living conditions and greater freedoms.”

But if improved living conditions and freedom led to democracy in North Korea, such a change would endanger the nineteenth-century-style, imperialist, “Open Door” fantasy that guides Washington’s international relations policies in East Asia. That fantasy, according to Paul Atwood, has been to gain “untrammeled right of entry into the marketplaces of all nations and territories and access to their resources and cheaper labor power on American terms, sometimes diplomatically, often by armed violence.” He provides a very brief and useful summary of the history of American geopolitical maneuvering in East Asia as it relates to Korea. This should have been on page 1 of the “Modern Korea” section in our high school history textbooks. U.S. policy towards Korea has always been about China and, as he explains, for the last two centuries there has been an “obsession” among the American elite business class with “opening” China. Faced with two possible paths in East Asia, either continuing to pursue the Open Door fantasy, or building through diplomacy a non-nuclear future in which homo sapiens might survive, Washington is once more taking the former path. A nuclear-free Korean Peninsula would give Americans more safety and security, too, but that is also a lower priority for Washington than profits for stockholders, CEOs, and the like.

8. Washington frequently sends its bombers to fly by North Korean airspace and scare North Koreans, such as on 24 September.

The above eight types of acts of provocation are very recent developments. The final two in this list below were done long ago, but they are surely remembered in North Korea, and thus continue to have an effect today.

9. Invading the DMZ. In 1976 a group of American and South Korean soldiers entered the “DMZ” (Demilitarized Zone), the forbidden buffer zone dividing the two countries, in order to cut down one poplar tree that was blocking their view of the North. This almost got the war going again.

10. Last but not least, there was the Korean War. This civil war did not end with a peace treaty and a process of reconciliation but only an armistice in 1953. The armistice left open the possibility of the War being restarted at any time. This fact, that the war did not result in a peaceful resolution of the civil conflict, is only one of its tragedies. It must be considered one of the most brutal wars in modern times. With the armistice, Koreans both north and south have been able to enjoy some peace, but their peace has been temporary and uncertain.

America killed millions of civilians on the Korean Peninsula, north and south, largely through aerial bombing. These attacks “hardly left a modern building standing.” Many villages were “washed downstream” by dams that were bombed in Kusong and Toksan (a recognized war crime), and even the capital city of Pyongyang, 27 miles away, was badly flooded. The “barbaric air war” destroyed “huge irrigation dams that provided water for 75 percent of the North’s food production.”

This near obliteration of infrastructure in Korea and the resultant suffering must remain deeply entrenched in the memories of North Koreans. As a result of the War, Koreans in the north have had to live continuously under the military hierarchy and oppression of a “garrison state.” Cumings employs the following definition: one in which the “specialists on violence are the most powerful group in society.”

Now as to the list of Pyongyang’s provocative actions, I lied. I am not going to bother writing about those because, well, most readers will already be familiar with them. Just do a search on the term “North Korea” on the pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post. We are well- informed about the wrongs done to us by other states, but have been kept in the dark about our own government’s wrongs. Such wrongs are “ours” in the sense that they have been committed in our name by Washington, even if we did not know about them.

What does Pyongyang want? Here are some of the key changes in the international relations of that government that it has demanded in the past:
1. A peace treaty with the U.S., the natural next step after the armistice that ended the Korean War
2. An end to threats from Washington
3. Recognition of its government

Myth Number 2: Beijing holds the key to resolving the present crisis

No. Washington does. Washington is the powerful aggressor on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea is a problem of Washington’s making. In fact, it should be referred to as the “American problem” rather than the “Korean problem,” as Gavan McCormack has pointed out. The term “the North Korean problem,” he writes, “commonly assumes North Korean aggression, irrationality, nuclear obsession and repression, and contrasts it with the United States’ rational, human rights based, globally responsible character. To thus shrink the framework of the problem, however, is to ignore the matrix of a century’s history—colonialism, division, ideological conflict, half a century of Korean War, Cold War as well as nuclear proliferation and intimidation, and to ignore what I have referred to as the U.S.’s aggressive, militarist hegemonism and contempt for international law.” McCormack rightly questions the way that the whole country has been “denounced in fundamentalist terms as ‘evil.’” Former president George W. Bush created the cartoonish category “the Axis of Evil,” and portrayed North Korea this way, along with Iraq and Iran. Without a critical investigation into this claim, many people who lack a basic understanding of modern Korean history readily buy into this easy simplification of the problem, as McCormack’s article demonstrates.

Anyone can see that the government based in Pyongyang violates the rights of its citizens in terrible ways, but people who sincerely seek peace on the Korean Peninsula and who wish to avoid a nuclear conflict and a possible World War III, must study a little history and acquire an adult view of the country, especially one that distinguishes between the actions of the military dictatorship that rules the country and the actions of ordinary citizens.

China certainly has a role to play but this is the “America problem” of the Korean Peninsula, and it is fair to point the finger at Washington. The American election system produced a winner and installed Donald Trump as president. He ramped up the tension with Pyongyang instead of talking to them as he said he would. And so here we are. The people of other nations have some role to play, but no matter how much we would like to ignore this crisis, it is we Americans who have to rise to the occasion, and stop this saber rattling in East Asia before it gets out of hand. As we know from Asia- Pacific War history, once the mad genie Mr. War is out of the bottle, it is very hard to put him back in.

Myth Number 3: Washington keeps its promises

No. Pyongyang has been better about keeping its promises than Washington. Making deals with Washington is frustrating for other states because it so often does not keep its promises. Just ask Native Americans. Ask their opinion of Washington’s trustworthiness when it comes to treaties. Washington violated virtually every treaty signed with Native Americans.

For a recent example of not honoring international agreements, consider the Trump’s about face on the Paris Climate Accord that was signed under the Obama administration.

Specifically, with respect to North Korea in recent decades, Washington repeatedly violated one important agreement. In line with a deal made under the Clinton administration, Pyongyang suspended its plutonium production from 1994 to 2002. Under this deal Pyongyang and Washington had also promised to not bear “hostile intent” toward each other. Pyongyang kept up its side of the bargain, but when George Bush lumped North Korea in with the “Axis of Evil” and announced a new policy of using preemptive strikes as a defense against an immediate threat to the security of the United States, the deal was off. Bush not only verbally threatened North Korea in this way, he demonstrated his resolve by invading Iraq, in violation of international law. Iraq was not an immediate threat to the U.S. Up until that point, i.e., that violation of the agreement with North Korea, a non-nuclear North Korea had been possible, if not a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. And this stands up to common sense—that the weaker state would have an interest in upholding promises than the stronger state. Why wouldn’t Pyongyang hold on to the possibility of peace with Washington for as long as possible? Again, violence is a weapon of the powerful.

Myth Number 4: War on the Korean Peninsula is thinkable

No. It is unthinkable. National security adviser H.R. McMaster said on 15 September, “For those who have said…commenting about the lack of a military option, there is a military option.” (His emphasis). McMaster may say so, and the Trump administration may be laying plans in the hopes of implementing a military solution, which is usually the U.S.’s ace card, but war on the Korean Peninsula is simply unthinkable. Many experts have emphasized that even with just the conventional weapons, an unacceptable number of South Koreans and Americans would die, and an unacceptable level of destruction would occur. If such a war spread to Japan or China or other countries, their citizens also would die in large numbers. There would be a high chance of nuclear weapons being employed. That could cause irreparable harm to our planet’s environment, causing suffering for many generations in the future, not only our generation.

Myth Number 5: The UN Security Council represents the will of the “international community”

No. They do not even represent the governments of the world, let alone the governed of the world—you and me. In other words, even if all the governments of the world were perfectly democratic, the Council would not represent the “international community.” Only states with nukes have veto power on the Council. It is obviously biased in favor of governments with nukes. The “Nuke Haves” want to hold onto theirs, and keep others from getting them. It is the “Nuke Have-nots” who want to purge the world of them, as we saw in the recent treaty banning nukes, known as the “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.” Even Tokyo, representing the only country to be attacked with nukes, did not support the Treaty. The fact that Japan enjoys the protection of Nuke Have Number One and has a military that is increasingly integrated with their military, and that Japan’s government is currently headed by an ultranationalist prime minister, are a few reasons one might imagine as to why Tokyo did not support it. The UN Security Council is the exclusive Club of imperial Nuke Haves. What it is doing is clamping crippling sanctions on North Korea, a newcomer knocking on the Club’s door. The Club does not wish to share its privileges with any other states. It is not a coincidence that none of the Nuke Haves signed on to the treaty to ban nukes, and almost all the Nuke Have-nots who also have no state sheltering them with a nuclear umbrella, did approve of it.

Myth Number 6: Americans understand how terrible a nuclear war would be

No. Americans as well as people in many other countries know little to nothing about what happens when a nuclear bomb is dropped on a city. Naturally, Japanese are much better informed about the effects of the atomic bombing of the major cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki than Americans. Many Americans who visit the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum speak of feeling great shock and emotional stress when they first go to the Museum and learn about the victims of the nuclear bombs that their government mercilessly dropped on civilians in August 1945. We were taught in school that these two bombings were humanitarian acts that ended the War quickly, saving the lives of both Japanese and Americans. But there is no question that the Nagasaki bombing was morally indefensible and unnecessary since it was committed only three days after the first bombing. Even the bombing of Hiroshima was arguably a war crime. One of the primary requests of the survivors is encapsulated in the anti-nuke chant, “No more Hiroshimas! No more Nagasakis!” The A-bomb victims (hibakusha in Japanese) themselves and people close to them generally express the hope that there will never be a full-blown nuclear war.

Imagine if the hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians killed in the initial bombing and aftermath were able to speak to the living today. What would they say now, at a point in history when we homo sapiens are at the “brink of global catastrophe,” i.e., a tragedy of unprecedented scale in which Washington’s greed and bullying on one side and Pyongyang’s resorting to the “nuclear deterrent” on the other lead to a nuclear war? One can only imagine their shock and anger that in 2017 such a catastrophe was still in the cards. They would certainly agree wholeheartedly with the “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons,” and would urge us to work hard to ban nukes. They would be overjoyed to see that 122 countries, the majority of the world’s countries, just banned nukes, even if the countries with nukes did not participate and still do not show any inclination to relinquish them. They would see the Treaty as a first step towards complete abolition. They would urge us to keep pushing until all the world’s countries had signed it and it was implemented. They also would support the bold initiative of World Beyond War to ban not only nuclear weapons but war in general.

Reference notes available on the World Beyond War website

Friday Night Racing Under the Threat of Nuclear Annihilation

Bruce Gerencser 5 Comments

hiroshima 1945

Last Friday —  on a day when Christian minds were focused on the death of Jesus —  my thoughts were turned towards spending time with my family, watching cars drive around a quarter-mile dirt track at speeds nearing one hundred miles per hour.

It was opening night at Limaland Motorsports Park. Featuring three classes of cars — 360 sprints, modified, and street stocks – Limaland is owned and operated by the University of Northwest Ohio — a private university known for its motor sports training program. Limaland is a well-run facility, with modern spectator stands, clean restrooms, and concessions that are both tasty and affordable.

As is our custom, we stopped at Kewpee Hamburgers on Allentown Road for dinner. Kewpee is throwback to the days before McDonald’s took over America. Featuring square hamburgers, chocolate malts, French fries, and soft drinks at affordable prices, Kewpee, on this Friday night, had lines out both doors, and the drive-thru was backed up on to the road. Such lines at many fast food restaurants would have meant long wait times, but the Kewpee staff, dressed in white clothing from head to toe, made quick work of the backup and we received our food in quickly.

Polly, my wife, was off work — a paid holiday in honor of an executed criminal — so she, along with Bethany, three of my sons, one son’s girlfriend,  four grandchildren, and my best friend David Echler, gathered at Kewpee before heading to the race track. The inside seating was packed, so we decide to sit at the outdoor seating towards the back of the restaurant property.

It was a beautiful night for racing. The sun was shining through the clouds, and the temperature at race time was in the seventies. We sat where we usually sit, part way up the stands, halfway between the fourth corner and the flag stand. There is always a risk of being pelted with dirt clods thrown off sprint car tires powering off turn four, but this is where Gerencsers sit, dirt clods be damned. Sure enough, several of us were hit with hurtling clods of dirt. No one, fortunately, was hurt.

The track was too wet for a 7:30 PM start time. It took track maintenance personnel twenty or so minutes to get the race surface ready for racing. Finally, the announcer said, Iet’s go racing!  Before the first race (Modified Dash for Cash, four cars race five laps, $100 to the winner), everyone was asked to stand for the invocation and the playing of the Star Spangled Banner. Men were asked to removed their hats. As is my custom, I refused to remove my hat as the announcer read a lame prayer to a mythical deity. After the prayer, I removed my hat, placed it over my heart, as I stood for the playing of America’s national anthem. I noticed my oldest son did the same.

The first race of the year is filled with promise for race teams. With newly painted cars and new or freshened motors, this will be the year, race teams tell themselves. Sadly, for many teams, their hopes and dreams quickly went up in smoke due to motor or other equipment troubles, and more than a few drivers found themselves needing the services of tow trucks to remove their broken speed machines from the track. This is racing.

As I sat there with my family enjoying the night’s events, my eyes noticed the sun setting in the west. Another day, I said to myself. I wonder if today will be the last day of life for me and those I love. Going to the race was supposed to take my mind off the cares of this world, but try as I might, I can’t help but think of the war of words going on between the two child rulers, Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un. Trading threats of mutual nuclear destruction, these men, by the time the racing program concluded, could have set in motion the end of the world. Stupid little boys, unzipping their pants to prove who has the bigger dick. Once red buttons are pushed, dick size won’t matter. We will all be dead, victims of American hubris and arrogance and North Korean insanity.

I looked at Polly, my best friend, my sons, one son’s girlfriend, and four of my grandchildren . . . will this be the last time I will ever see them? Am I being too cynical? Am I worrying when there is no reason to do so? Should I just kick back and enjoy life? You know, don’t worry, be happy. Doing so is probably the best course of action. What can I do about what is going on in Washington? I am a powerless member of the Proletariat. Politicians promise the world to gain my vote, and once elected, these whores for corporate America forget their promises, choosing instead to enacts laws that benefit the Inner Party (see Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell). Every two, four, and six years new promises are made, and working class Americans such as myself dutifully return to the polls and vote for the “lesser of two evils.” We vote because people supposedly smarter than we tell us, EVERY VOTE matters, but deep down we doubt whether this is true.

The 2016 Presidential election was, in some ways, the Proletariat rising up in a great swell of ignorance to elect a man who promised to be different from the oligarchy that rules America. Donald Trump, now the forty-fifth president of the United States, has quickly cast aside his promises to working class Americans, choosing instead to fill his cabinet and federal jobs with family, friends, and shills for Wall Street. Political war is looming, and it remains to been seen if President Trump will avoid impeachment before being voted out of office in 2020. Not that this will matter if war-mongering Evangelicals and hawks get their way.

Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, along with numerous congressional Republicans and a few congressional Democrats, see violence as the answer for everything that hampers our pursuit of the mythical (and harmful) American Dream. Wrongly thinking that the American military cannot be defeated — forgetting the Korean Conflict, the Vietnam War, and our multiple wars in the Middle East — these bloody-handed politicians ignore the poor, collapsing infrastructures, declining wages, and out-of-control health care costs, all so they can spend over a trillion dollars for defense and national security — more than China, Russia, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany combined. Thirty-four percent of all military spending worldwide is attributed to the United States.  Yet, according to President Trump and his minions, the military needs MORE money so it can rebuild itself after eight years of decimation under President Barack Obama. Trump has asked Congress to increase military spending by almost $60 billion, while at the same time drastically reducing funding for vital social programs, along with crippling the EPA, Department of Energy, and Department of Education — to name just a few.

Several weeks ago, President Trump released his proposed federal budget. For those of us who value social progress — along with clean air, water, and environmental protection — the budget released by President Trump and his sycophants is no less than a declaration of war on the working class and poor. Even worse, the Ayn Rand/Paul Ryan/Koch Brothers/Tea Party wing of the Republican Party doesn’t think the President made enough cuts. By tanking President Trump’s destruction of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), these white-sheet Libertarians let it be known that they will not rest until their corporate masters have absolute control and working Americans are reduced to numbers on a spreadsheet — means of production meant to enrich their overlords.

Try as I might to just enjoy the race, I can’t. As an atheist and a humanist, I know that this life is the only one I have, and that once I am dead I will never see my loved ones again. I deeply love my family and friends, and I want them to have a happy and prosperous future. I want my grandchildren to have their own children without fear of being obliterated by violence, war, or terrorist attacks. I want them to have good jobs, nice homes, and all the trappings of the American way of life. I want them to be socially and environmentally conscious, believing that the whole world is their brother. Most of all, I want them to remember their father and grandfather as a man who wasn’t afraid to speak his mind on the important issues of the day.

I have no idea if my words make a difference. There are days when I wonder if our world is engaged in a struggle that will ultimately lead to our extermination and I might as well turn on the TV, grab a bag of chocolates and a bottle of wine, and spend my nights mindlessly watching M*A*S*H reruns. It would be easy for me to think that the Borg of Star Trek fame have taken our world captive —  You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

The sun finally set and my mind returned to the race track. The heat and feature races were exciting, well worth the $12 price of admission. After pulling into our driveway, I told my friend David, hey, we will have to do this again. He replied, sounds good. And then, as he walked away, I said, that is if Donald Trump doesn’t get us nuked.

Go Ahead, Donald Trump Supporters, Defend Your Man

Bruce Gerencser 17 Comments

mike-pence-donald-trump

Republicans who voted for Donald Trump bristled when I described their man as a narcissistic, psychopathic, bigoted, pathological liar. They objected when I said that Donald Trump acts like a junior high boy obsessed with his handsomeness and dick size. I warned that Donald Trump was not fit to be a trash truck driver, let alone President of the United States. I reminded people that Donald Trump was a lying, cheating failed businessman who had no regard for the Constitution and the rule of law. I challenged Republicans to consider what could happen if the orange-haired toddler was given the power to order troops into conflict and fire nuclear weapons.  Yet, here were are, not thirty days into the Trump presidency, and the man who was going to drain the swamp and make America great again has turned the United States into the laughingstock of the world.

Just today, Donald Trump gave an impromptu press briefing that has left many Americans wondering if the President is mentally ill. How else can Trump’s behavior be explained? Rolling Stone published a summary of some of the ravings-of-a-lunatic worthy statements made by Trump. Enjoy!

That time he batted back reports of chaos in the West Wing

“I turn on TV, open the newspapers and I see stories of chaos – chaos – yet it is the exact opposite. This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine.”

That time he confirmed the veracity of the leaks that lead to Michael Flynn’s resignation

“The leaks are absolutely real. The news is fake because so much of the news is fake.”

That time he couldn’t say Flynn lied

“The thing is, he didn’t tell our vice president properly, and then he said he didn’t remember … that just wasn’t acceptable to me.”

That time he characterized the rollout of his travel ban as “smooth”

“We had a very smooth rollout of the travel ban; we had a bad court.”

That time he called the country of Russia fake news

“Russia is fake news. Russia – this is fake news put out by the media. The real news is the fact that people, probably from the Obama administration because they’re there, because we have our new people going in place, right now.”

That time he denied knowledge of whether anyone from his team colluded with the Russian government during the campaign

“Nobody that I know of. How many times do I have to answer this question? Russia is a ruse. I have nothing to do with Russia. Haven’t made a phone call to Russia in years.”

That time he bragged about not being a bad person

“And I’ll tell you what else I see. I see tone. You know the word ‘tone’? The tone is such hatred. I’m really not a bad person, by the way. No, but the tone is such – I do get good ratings, you have to admit that – the tone is such hatred.”

That time he compared the price of drugs to that of candy bars

“We’ve ordered the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to coordinate on a plan to destroy criminal cartels coming into the United States with drugs. We’re becoming a drug-infested nation. Drugs are becoming cheaper than candy bars.”

That time he promised America and Russia would have a nuclear holocaust “like no other”

“We’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are they. I have been briefed. And I can tell you, one thing about a briefing that we’re allowed to say, because anybody that ever read the most basic book can say it, nuclear holocaust would be like no other. They’re a very powerful nuclear country, and so are we.”

That time he mused about attacking the Russian vessel lurking off the coast of Connecticut

“The greatest thing I could do [politically] is shoot that ship that’s 30 miles offshore right out of the water.”

That time he conceded his oft-repeated line about having the “biggest electoral margin since Ronald Reagan” is a lie

NBC reporter Peter Alexander: “You said today that you had the biggest electoral margin since Ronald Reagan – 304, 306 electoral votes. In fact, President Obama got 365 in 2008.”
Trump: “Well, I’m talking about Republicans.”
Alexander: “President Obama 333, George H.W. Bush 426 when he won. So why should Americans trust…”
Trump: “I was given that information, I was just given it. We had a very big margin.”
Alexander: “I guess the question is: Why should Americans trust you when you accuse the information they receive as being fake, when you’re providing information that is not accurate?”
Trump: “Well, I was given that information. I was, actually, I’ve seen that information around. But it was a very substantial victory. Do you agree with that?”
Alexander: “You’re the president.”

That time he explained uranium

“We had Hillary Clinton give Russia 20 percent of the uranium in our country. You know what uranium is, right? This thing called nuclear weapons, and other things. Like, lots of things are done with uranium, including some bad things. Nobody talks about that.”

That time he offered a nuanced critique of Hillary Clinton’s record as secretary of state

“Hillary Clinton did the reset, remember? With the stupid plastic button that made us all look like a bunch of jerks. Here, take a look. He looked at her like, ‘What the hell is she doing?’ With that cheap plastic button. Hillary Clinton. That was a reset. Remember it said ‘Reset’? Now if I do that oh, I’m the bad guy.”

That time he offered a nuanced assessment of his own performance at said press conference

“I’m not ranting and raving. I’m just telling you you’re dishonest people.”

That time he grew tired of all the tough questions

“I want to find a friendly reporter.”

That time he was asked about Melania’s role as first lady

“That is what I call a nice question. … She – like others, like others that she’s working with – feel very, very strongly about women’s issues, women’s difficulties.”

That time he responded to a question – from a Jewish reporter – about the uptick in threats against Jewish organizations

“OK, sit down. … So here’s the story, folks. Number one, I am the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life. Number two, racism – the least racist person.”

That time he assumed a black reporter would be friends with black members of Congress

April Ryan: “Will you meet with the Congressional Black Caucus?”
Trump: “I would. You want to set up the meeting? Are they friends of yours?”

By all means, Republicans, defend your man. You voted for him, and helped to put him into office. You must now own what you did. I hope you are rational and mature enough to realize that you made a h-o-r-r-i-b-l-e mistake, and that you will, when the time comes, support efforts to remove Donald Trump from office. That is if we all don’t die from radiation exposure first.

The Lord is On Our Side

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments

god is on our sideEvangelicals are fond of saying that the LORD is on their side. Culture warriors frequently invoke God being with them as proof that their causes are righteous and just. Christian politicians, when justifying their murderous, imperialistic wars, often suggest that God not only approves of their violence, but is also the mighty general that leads the troops into battle.

From February 23 to March 6, 1836, Mexican President General Antonio López de Santa Anna and his troops laid siege to the Alamo. On March 6th, Mexican troops overran the Alamo’s defenses, killing several hundred people in the process.

The day after the siege began, William B. Travis, the commander of the Texian forces, wrote an open letter titled To the People of Texas & All Americans in the World. Travis wrote:

To the People of Texas & All Americans in the World:

Fellow citizens & compatriots—I am besieged, by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna—I have sustained a continual Bombardment & cannonade for 24 hours & have not lost a man. The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword, if the fort is taken—I have answered the demand with a cannon shot, & our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat. Then, I call on you in the name of Liberty, of patriotism & everything dear to the American character, to come to our aid, with all dispatch—The enemy is receiving reinforcements daily & will no doubt increase to three or four thousand in four or five days. If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible & die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor & that of his country—Victory or Death.

William Barret Travis

Lt. Col. comdt

P.S. The Lord is on our side—When the enemy appeared in sight we had not three bushels of corn—We have since found in deserted houses 80 or 90 bushels & got into the walls 20 or 30 head of Beeves.

Travis, like countless Christians before and after him, believed that the LORD was on his side. Despite overwhelming forces outside the Alamo gates, Travis believed God would send reinforcements and lead them to victory over the Mexicans. No reinforcements came, and Travis, along with most of the people behind the walls of the Alamo, died.

Twenty-five years later, the United States found itself embroiled in a violent, bloody civil war that resulted in 750,000 deaths. Both the North and the South claimed that God was on their side. The 20th century would find the United States embroiled in two world wars and major conflicts in Korea and Vietnam.  Fueled by theocratic and nationalistic fervor, American political leaders believed that a victory over totalitarianism and communism was a triumph for Christianity. In other words, THE LORD IS ON OUR SIDE!

In the late 20th and 21st century, the United States found itself waging a crusade in the Middle East against Islāmic terrorists.  President George W. Bush framed invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan as holy wars — good vs. evil. God is on our side, President Bush told the American people, repeating a time-worn cliché that has resulted in maiming and killing millions of people.

The 2016 presidential election invigorated the religious-right, resulting in the election of the most unqualified candidate in American history — Donald Trump. Eighty-two percent of white Evangelicals voted for a man who bragged about sexual assault and grabbing pussy. Believing that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party were the personification of evil, Evangelicals stormed the throne room of heaven with their prayers and voted their “conscience.” Come January 20th, Evangelicals will cheer as God’s man becomes the forty-fifth president of the Christian United States of America. In unison they will cry, THE LORD IS ON OUR SIDE!

And when a modern-day battle of the Alamo, one fought with weapons that have the power to erase the human race, causes horrific bloodshed, will Evangelicals still cry, THE LORD IS ON OUR SIDE?  When millions of people lose their health insurance, their good-paying jobs, and Social Security benefits are cut, will Evangelicals still think God is on their side?

How much suffering, death, and loss must happen before Christians are willing to admit that, when it comes to the machinations of men, God is nowhere to be found. The only gods at work in the affairs of men are those who are very much earthly. If God is indeed on their side, then Christians have no response when secularists say that their God is a violent, bloodthirsty megalomaniac. If the Lord is on the United States’ side, then he is culpable for the worldwide slaughter of millions of men, women, children. He is responsible for the savagery of those who, with great fervor and pride, say THE LORD IS ON OUR SIDE! And when the last news reports Americans hear warn of incoming “enemy” nuclear warheads, just remember, THE LORD IS ON OUR SIDE!

Is President Obama Anti-Christian?

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments

obama antichrist 3

According to the hysteria wing of the Republican party, also known as Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christianity, President Obama is anti-Christian. Some go so far as to say that he is actually a Muslim, even though he has publicly identified as Christian numerous times.  President Obama spoke at the February 2015 National Prayer Breakfast. He stated:

And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ, In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

So it is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a simple tendency that can pervert and distort our faith…

…I believe that the starting point of faith is some doubt — not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn’t speak to others. That God only cares about us and doesn’t care about others. That somehow we alone are in possession of the truth.

At the recent White House Easter breakfast, the President stated:

On Easter I do reflect on the fact that, as a Christian, I am supposed to love. And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.

obama antichrist 2

The rabid religious right thinks these statements prove that the President is anti-Christian.  As I read these statements, all I see is a man pointing out the obvious; that Christianity has a violent, bloody past and that many Christians don’t know the first thing about love. What is also obvious is that no matter what the President says or does , the religious right is going to twist his words and use them to make political hay. No matter what he says or how he tries to explain himself, he will be, in the eyes of many on the religious right, the Kenyan born nigger socialist Muslim who hates America, hates Christianity, and is secretly plotting to establish an Islamic caliphate in the United States.

Here are some of the comments left by Christians on the aforementioned  One News Now articles:

You BHO are such a liar. You use every opportunity to twist the truth. Actually, you wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped you in the face. Jesus said,”I am the way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father BUT by me.” Can I be adamant about what truth is? You bethcha buster. I repeat, you wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped you in the face, and from Darryl said, I would say that it did slap you in the face, but you still went on reading your prepared, twisted script. You being at the National Prayer Breakfast is like the devil sitting at the last supper. IMHO

Obama’s comments trying to paint Islam and Christianity as morally equivalent in their teachings are infuriating. I am outraged by his efforts to downplay the utter horror of what ISIS is doing right now in the world– beheading, torturing, crucifying, burying alive small children in scores, and selling those who live into sex slavery for the depraved appetites of sick, demon-possessed Muslim jihadists– by drawing attention to crimes committed in the name of Christ many centuries ago. Nothing that is happening in the world today in the name of Christ can begin to be compared for cruelty and brutality to what the demonic savages in Iraq are doing to children in the name of Allah. Mr. President– where is your outrage? They are burying children alive! Professing Christians who committed acts of violence in the name of Christ centuries ago to advance Christ’s kingdom were violating Christ’s teachings; Muslim jihadis who commit acts of violence in the name Allah to promote the Islamic caliphate are fulfilling Mohammed’s teaching. Someone needs to tell our president that the “medieval” problem with Christianity was set right a long time ago; he needs to open his eyes and deal with atrocities happening today in the 21st century, and get off his high horse from which he would scold American Christians for criticizing Islam.

It seems Obama is determined to play down the religious aspect of the Islamic State by stating they are not unique. Bringing up subjects that many people do not have enough information about except for the rhetoric is dangerous, inflammatory and downright wrong. What does he hope to accomplish? Acceptance of his indifference and ineffectual strategy of what to do as our “leader”?

Wow! Are you serious Mr. President? Did you really just go back over 700 years to find an example of how Christianity is as bad as ISIS? Jim Crow? For real? A simple, brief look into Islam and the teachings of Jesus Christ will reveal to any honest seeker of truth that there are vast differences. Mohammed taught “I have the truth of God, convert or die.” Jesus taught, “I am the way the truth and the life, and no man can come unto the Father but by me. ” And to prov God’s love for man Jesus laid down His life for us! Big difference Mr. President!

Our nation is being led by a very confused and deluded individual.

That man…..he really rubs me the wrong way because of his deceitfulness and attempting with all his might to destroy America and lift up Islam. Obama is NOT a Christian! He could go and live in a garage but that doesn’t make him a car!

Jesus said a tree is known by its fruits. President Obama’s fruits are quite evident. He is condescending in his remarks to Christians but always lauds Muslims and the Islamic faith and refuses to link Islam with Islamic terrorists. The President is a Christian in name only.

President Obama’s inconsistency is as disturbing as his overt dishonesty and misrepresentation concerning many other things…. Obamacare, IRS targeting, “Climate Change”, Keystone pipeline, Iran negotiations, arbitrary accusations of racism, etc. His behavior seems, at least, “disturbed”, and unstable. There IS a pattern of anti-Christian rhetoric, as well as a larger pattern of vindictive behavior in reaction to all dissent, opposition, or criticism.

I be glad when black nword is gone.

If any of the eternal optimists out there think things are going to get better anytime soon, just remember this: On any given day, Obama’s approval numbers always remain at the 45-50% level, and he was elected not once, but twice by your fellow “Americans”. I’m no math genius, but that tells me that at least half the country is perfectly fine with the Anointed One’s policies and his performance. And THAT simple fact, my friends, is why the country is doomed.

The country is not doomed if we hold to our 2nd amendment rights and arm ourselves. The Obama government is afraid of us because we are capable of armed resistance in a meaningful way. When we disarm or allow ourselves to be disarmed then the government will cease to be afraid of us and all hell will break loose. Keep buying the equivalent of the 18th century rifled musket, aka the modern high capacity magazine AR-15 or AR-10.

Obama is the walking epitome of an anti-Christian bigot posing as a “Christian”. He hates God, His Chosen People, and the followers of Yeshua Messiah. He NEVER sides with Christians, ALWAYS sides with anti-Christ Islamic teachings, never sides with white folks, always sides with NON-white folks.

He has nothing between the ears , unless a barely disguised hatred against Christians . And the leftist politicians, has a pet hate for Christians . For example , gays and lesbians , persecute Christians , because of their religious values. Are of a very great evil .

The president has lied to us since day one. If he wasn’t a Muslim, then why did he say that the cross had to be cover before he could make a speech at the cathedral? Why did the have Franklin Graham pulled from speaking at the Prayer Breakfast? Why is he giving aid to the Muslim Brotherhood?

Clearly this POTUS is a foreshadowing of the anti-Christ, not the anti-Christ himself you understand, but a shadow of things to come. If he was truly of Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit and full of understanding given by the Holy Spirit, he would not say the things he says or do the things he does. He is what the Godless deserve and just may be a tool of God’s judgement of an increasingly and deliberately Godless America.

I cannot believe that any POTUS would take such opportunities to disparage Christianity at every chance he gets. His disdain for the Christian faith is incomprehensible. I have never seen, in my 70 years of living, a president who insists on undermining the very force that has been the backbone of our country’s social and moral fabric since 1776. Please, Mr. Obama, get out of the White House and out of our lives.

Mr. Obama was raised as a Muslim. His father was a Muslim. According to the Qumran a Muslim who leaves the faith is to be killed. Since there have been no attempts on the President;s life I must assume he is still a Muslim. Perhaps that is why he does not care about Christians and likes to criticize Christianity.

Barrack Hussein is an anti-Christian bigot and a dispicable traitor to the country. Sadly this person is what the American people voted for…twice. I watched him deceive the nation as he spoke with John McCain at Saddleback Church and said marriage is between one man and one woman, then turned to become the first homosexual president. So is Hussein Obama the deceiver to blame or the depraved American society that lives with luxuries that the rest of the world could not even imagine. Do Americans love the darkness and depravity more than the light and goodness? I would have to answer yes. There is no turning back now, this is what America wants. Time for us to stand firm and be the light and lampstand while times and events continue to degrade, as prophesied.

It’s strange that for someone who claims to be a Christian, Barack Obama is the most virulently anti-Christian leader this country has ever had.

obama antichrist 4

And there are a hundred more comments just like these. It is quite evident that many right-wing Christians hate the President. It is also quite evident that many of them are paranoid as hell and think they are being persecuted. I recently wrote about this in The Paranoia and Persecution Complex of the Religious Right.

Is President Obama really doing nothing to combat Muslim extremism? Of course not. We have boots on the ground in the Middle East, drones and bombers in the air, and are spending billions of dollars to combat terrorism.

Right wing Christians should spend some time learning the history of Christianity. Are the bloodletting years of Christianity ancient history? Consider how President George W Bush framed the two wars he started in the Middle East. He called them a crusade. President Bush saw these wars as not only a clash of civilizations, but a clash of religions.  President Bush’s public comments were frequently littered with words meant to remind people of the superiority of Christianity and the United States. Perhaps President Obama doesn’t buy the American myth, that we are a chosen people, an exceptional people. If so, this is progress.

The United States is arguably one of  most religious countries in the world. Is it any wonder the Muslim world views our war against “terrorism” as a religious war? ISIS, Boko Haram, and other such terrorist groups, should be hunted down and killed. While I am a pacifist, I am also a realist. ISIS is not going to stop until they have exerted their will on the entire Middle East. The President knows this and I think he is doing what he can to stop the slaughter of innocent civilians, regardless of their religious affiliation.

And let me be clear, the United States, through its decade and a half war on terrorism, has slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom were innocent civilians. In fact, the United States is one of the most violent, bloody sovereign states in modern history. I will soon be fifty-eight years old and the United States has been at war for most of my life. We’ve not fought a just war in seventy years.

obama antichrist

It’s time we be honest about our past and stop thinking that the United States is in any way exceptional or favored by the gods. While we might have good intentions, it is evident that our imperialistic, colonialist tendencies still drive the government and public discourse. As President Obama works hard to broker a nuclear deal with Iran, right-wing Christians and Republicans go out of their way to scuttle the deal, even suggesting that we bomb Iran.  Somehow, they envision us bombing Iran and there not being any consequences for doing so. What I see is nuclear weapons being fired and the world being plunged into global conflict. Are those on the right so ignorant of history that they can not see the danger of their rhetoric? Will it take a nuclear bomb landing on Washington DC before they will wake up to the irresponsibility of their words and actions? By then, of course, they will have been vaporized.

As the above comments show, a large number of Christians are buying what Fox News, World Net Daily, and the various right-wing news organizations are selling. I fear that some of them will become so enraged that they really will exercise their so called second amendment rights. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of same-sex marriage, it is possible that some on the extreme right will go after gays, killing them, or take to the streets in violent protest. Why? Because many right-wing Christian really believe they are being persecuted. They really believe THEIR country has been stolen from them. Their passions are inflamed by war mongering pastors, TV preachers, and right-wing talk show hosts. Once inflamed, reason, responsibility, and tolerance go out the window.

Notes

Graphics found on Christian websites.

Anyone who uses the President’s middle name in a comment, article, or news show is revealing that they are a racist bigot.

 

 

Bruce Gerencser