In the true history of nations, the mere passage of time does not alter the morality of crimes against humanity. The definition of “atrocity” does not depend upon who commits it or the reasons for so doing. Surely these two nuclear bombs stepped over the threshold of crimes against humanity. This can be called Nuclear Insanity
The weapons are products of our fear, our greed, our desire for power, and our stupidity. Some Japanese have an expression for this current period of human history; they call it “the era of nuclear madness.” But Robert Oppenheimer warned us, that the real task at hand was not nuclear weapons but the elimination of war itself. "We know this because in the last war, the two nations which we like to think are the most enlightened and humane in the world—Great Britain and the United States—used atomic, (i.e., nuclear) weapons against an enemy which was essentially defeated, . . . it is not thinkable that in any major conflict, where the very life of a nation may be at stake, these weapons will not be used, they are much too effective for that."[2] … And we note that the next time it will not be one-sided. Next time it is very likely that there would be an exchange of nuclear destruction and death.
Consider this: It would be fair to say that since 1945 the United States has spent some $20,000,000,000,000 ($20 trillion, AI-Gemini agrees) on all preparations to defend the United States and our friends from the opposition. Let me put it another way: There has been spent twenty trillion dollars for preparations to destroy and kill other nations and their people with whom we disagree. Just think of all the work-earned-and-paid taxes that went into that twenty trillion, instead of being used for all phases of the betterment of mankind. Truly, that has got to be, and will never ever be, a greater act of stupidity. Oppenheimer probably understood this, naming the goal, the elimination of war itself.
In the following, a plan or strategy is proposed that, if adopted: would put “everyone” back to work; bring peace and stability; end war-sacrificed lives; and ensure satisfactory industrial profits, growth, and cooperation; and would allow people to return to peaceful opportunity-laden homelands. This workable moral strategy, for decades or centuries to come, seems the only approach by which people of the Less Developed world, in peace, without war, can become masters of their own nation, can create an intelligent path to their own peaceful destinies, as so many other nations have done. This workable moral strategy exports no United States’ or other nations’ money. It fosters the expressed desires of all people and nations seeking: peace, justice, opportunity, and a better life. This strategy has been referred to by some as “brilliant.” Well, certainly; the strategy incorporates ideas advocated by J. Robert Oppenheimer, Albert Einstein, Philip Morrison & Kostas Tsipis [10], Naomi Shohno [11], and James C. Warf [12], some very wise fellows. This is the strategy that picks up where Einstein, Oppenheimer, and Shohno left off. We describe and recommend a workable moral strategy that can be referred to as the “incentivization” of world peace. (The United States does not have a single, unified world peace plan; neither does Russia, China or the United Nations.) Incentivization of the type to be proposed seems missing in all other plans.
Adoption of this policy means an exchange can be made: —With self-sufficiency and self-defined but true democracy growing in the Less Developed world and the virtual elimination there of poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition, disease, neocolonialism, rights deprivation, indebtedness, exploitation, and slavery; —The entire world could have full economic recovery, elimination of the possibility for international nuclear catastrophe, and the practical elimination of war. In a world at peace the refugee problem is solved. The killing stops and solutions to worldwide problems can be worked upon and found.
As promised, no money would leave any nation, and all the credit chits never pass through the World Bank, or any bank, or the International Monetary Fund. This moral strategy considerably modifies military spending by all nations. If all nations are fulfilling their obligations working for peace, what need is there for offensive armament, nuclear bombs and missiles? What need would there be for military defenses.
Each year this workable and moral program would see returned to the non-military economies of the Developed nations, in total, some US$330 billion or more, to be used solely for deliverance of peacetime goods, tools, and services! Hence, this proposed program should greatly reduce unemployment in any nation participating, supplier or receiver. This program will put workers, the original creators of wealth, back into manufacturing jobs, making useful products for a peaceful world. When this plan is activated individual citizens of participating Developed nations would come to understand that they are active participants, creating tools, equipment, materials, and know-how, making possible peace and justice onto all regions of the world, and doing it without guns, bombs, drones and missiles, without destruction and killing thousands or tens of thousands.
Citizens of the Less Developed world will finally begin to see their hopes and dreams of a peaceful advancing homeland coming true. Their long sought permanent homes, employment opportunities, health care, utilities, schools, society, foods and water, secure coastlines, etc., all coming into being, and by their own work and efforts, with the tools, equipment, materials and know-how provided by all the participating Developed nations of the UN who committed themselves to such types of obligation with their UN Charter signature.[13] Their fear of their home being plowed under or bombed would no longer exist.
There are likely 8 billion people worldwide who would welcome this plan for world peace with open arms. Support is there! It may require new ways of thinking. But listen closely to the naysayers and from whence come their thoughts, words, and actions, and how their wealth depends upon the war and military industries, not the peace industry.. And recall that the average annual death toll from wars is in excess of one million.[8]