On the Edge of a Nuclear Abyss

Two days after Russia attacked Ukraine and the day before Vladimir Putin put Russia on nuclear alert, I wrote a little article whose first sentence was: “Not wanting to sound hyperbolic, but I am starting to conclude that the nuclear madmen running the U.S./NATO New Cold War they started decades ago are itching to start a nuclear war with Russia.”

It was an intuition based on my knowledge of U.S./Russia history, including the U.S engineered coup in Ukraine in 2014, and a reading of current events.  I refer to it as intuition, yet it is based on a lifetime’s study and teaching of political sociology and writing against war.  I am not a Russian scholar, simply a writer with a sociological, historical, and artistic imagination, although my first graduate academic study in the late 1960s was a thesis on nuclear weapons and why they might be someday used again.

It no longer sounds hyperbolic to me that madmen in the declining U.S. Empire might resort, like rats in a sinking ship, to first strike use of nuclear weapons, which is official U.S. policy.  My stomach is churning at the thought, despite what most experts say: that the chances of a nuclear war are slight.  And despite what others say about the Ukraine war: that it is an intentional diversion from the Covid propaganda and the Great Reset (although I agree it achieves that goal).

My gut tells me no; it is very real, sui generis, and very, very dangerous now.

The eminent scholar Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research agrees that we are very close to the unthinkable.  In a recent historical analysis of U.S.-Russia relations and nuclear weapons, he writes the following before quoting Vladimir Putin’s recent statement on the matter. “Vladimir Putin’s statement on February 21st, 2022 was a response to U.S. threats to use nuclear weapons on a preemptive basis against Russia, despite Joe Biden’s “reassurance” that the U.S. would not be resorting to ‘A first strike’ nuclear attack against an enemy of America”:

Let me [Putin] explain that U.S. strategic planning documents contain the possibility of a so-called preemptive strike against enemy missile systems. And who is the main enemy for the U.S. and NATO? We know that too. It’s Russia. In NATO documents, our country is officially and directly declared the main threat to North Atlantic security. And Ukraine will serve as a forward springboard for the strike.” (Putin Speech, February 21, 2022, emphasis added)

Putin is absolutely correct.  It is why he put Russia’s nuclear forces on full alert.   Only those ignorant of history, which sadly includes most U.S. Americans, don’t know this.

I believe that today we are in the greatest danger of a nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962, something I vividly remember as a teenager.  The same feelings return.  Dread.  Anxiety.  Breathlessness.  I do not think these feelings are misplaced nor they are simply an emotional response. I try to continue writing on other projects that I have started but feel stymied.  The possibility of nuclear war, whether intentional or accidental, obsesses me.

In order to grasp this stomach-churning possibility within the context of Ukraine, we need to put aside all talk of morality, rights, international law, and think in terms of great power politics, as John Mearsheimer has so clearly articulated.  As he says, when a great power feels its existence is threatened, might makes right. You simply can’t understand world politics without thinking at this level.  Doing so does not mean justifying the use of might; it is a means of clarifying the causes of wars, which start long before the first shots are fired.

In the present crisis over Ukraine, Russia clearly feels existentially threatened by U.S./NATO military moves in Ukraine and in eastern Europe where they have positioned missiles that can be very quickly converted to nuclear and are within a few minutes range of Russia. (And of course there are U.S./NATO nuclear missiles throughout western and southern Europe.)  Vladimir Putin has been talking about this for many years and is factually correct.  He has reiterated that this is unacceptable to Russia and must stop. He has pushed for negotiations to end this situation.

The United States, despite its own Monroe Doctrine that prohibits another great power from putting weapons or military forces close to its borders, has blocked its ears and kept upping the ante, provoking Russian fears. This fact is not in dispute but is shrugged off by U.S./NATO as of little consequence.  Such an attitude is pure provocation as anyone with a smidgeon of historical awareness knows.

The world was very lucky sixty years ago this October when JFK and Nikita Khrushchev negotiated the end of the Cuban Missile Crisis before the world was incinerated.  Kennedy, of course, was intensely pressured by the military and CIA to bomb Cuba, but he resisted.  He also rejected the insane military desire to nuke the Soviet Union, calling such people crazy; at a National Security Council meeting on September 12, 1963, when the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented a report about a nuclear first strike against the Soviet Union which they wanted for that fall, he said, “Preemption is not possible for us.”

Such leadership, together with the nuclear test ban treaty he negotiated with the USSR that month, inter alia (such treaties have now been abrogated by the U.S. government), assured his assassination organized by the CIA.  These days, the U.S. is led by deluded men who espouse a nuclear first strike policy, which tells one all one needs to know about the danger the world is in. The U.S. has been very sick with Russia hatred for a long time.

After the terror of the Cuban Missile Crisis, many more people took the threat of nuclear war seriously.  Today very few do.  It has receded into the ”unimaginable.” In 1962, however, as James W. Douglass writes in JFK and the Unspeakable:

Kennedy saw that, at least outside Washington, D.C., people were living with a deeper awareness of the ultimate choice they faced.  Nuclear weapons were real.  So, too, was the prospect of peace.  Shocked by the Cuban Missile Crisis into recognizing a real choice, people preferred peace to annihilation.

Today the reality of nuclear annihilation has receded into unconsciousness. This despite the recent statements by U.S. generals and the U.S. Ukrainian puppet Zelensky about nuclear weapons and their use that have extremely inflamed Russia’s fears, which clearly is intentional. The game is to have some officials say it and then deny it while having a policy that contradicts your denial.  Keep pushing the envelope is U.S. policy.  Obama-Biden reigned over the U.S. 2014 coup in Ukraine, Trump increased weapon sales to Ukraine in 2017, and Biden has picked up the baton from his partner (not his enemy) in this most deadly game.  It is a bi-partisan Cold War 2, getting very hot.  And it is the reason why Russia, its back to the wall, attacked Ukraine.  It is obvious that this is exactly what the U.S. wanted or it would have acted very differently in the leadup to this tragedy.  All the current ringing of hands is pure hypocrisy, the nihilism of a nuclear power never for one moment threatened but whose designs were calculated to threaten Russia at its borders.

The media propaganda against Russia and Putin is the most extreme and extensive propaganda in my lifetime.  Patrick Lawrence has astutely examined this in a recent essay, where he writes the same is true for him:

Many people of many different ages have remarked in recent days that they cannot recall in their lifetimes a more pervasive, suffocating barrage of propaganda than what has engulfed us since the months that preceded Russia’s intervention. In my case it has come to supersede the worst of what I remember from the Cold War decades.

Engulfed is an appropriate word.  Lawrence rightly points to this propaganda as cognitive warfare directed at the U.S. population (and the rest of the world) and notes its connection to the January 2021 final draft of a “diabolic” NATO study called “Cognitive Warfare.”  He quotes it thus: “The brain will be the battlefield of the 21st century,” . . . “Humans are the contested domain. Cognitive warfare’s objective is to make everyone a weapon.”

This cognitive warfare, however, has a longer history in cutting edge science.  For each successive decade beginning with the 1990s and a declaration from President (and ex-Director of the CIA) George H. W. Bush that the 1990s would be the Decade of Brain Research, presidents have announced additional decades long projects involving the brain, with 2000-2010 being the Decade of Behavior Project, followed by mapping of the brain, artificial intelligence, etc. all organized and funded through the Office of Science and Technology Project (OSTP) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).  This medical, military, and scientific research has been part of a long range plan to extend MK-Ultra’s mind control to the population at large under the cover of medical science, and it has been simultaneously connected to the development and funding of the pharmaceutical industries research and development of new brain-altering drugs.  RFK, Jr. has documented the CIA’s extensive connection to germ and mind research and promotion in his book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health.  It is why his book is banned from the mainstream media, who do the prime work of cognitive warfare for the government.  To put it clearly: these media are the CIA.  And the issue of U.S. bio-weapons research and development is central to these many matters, including in Ukraine.

In other words, the cognitive warfare we are now being subjected to has many tentacles connected to much more than today’s fanatical anti-Russian propaganda over Ukraine.  All the U.S. wars of aggression have been promoted under its aegis, as have the lies about the attacks of September 11, 2001, the economic warfare by the elites, the COVID crisis, etc.  It’s one piece.

Take, for example, a book written in 2010 by David Ray Griffin, a renown theologian who has written more than a dozen books about 9/11.  The book is Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee’s Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy TheoryIt is a critique of law professor Cass Sunstein, appointed by Obama to be the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.  Sunstein had written an article with a plan for the government to prevent the spread of anti-government “conspiracy theories” in which he promoted the use of anonymous government agents to use secret “cognitive infiltration” of these groups in order to break them up; to use media plants to disparage their arguments.  He was particularly referring to those who questioned the official 9/11 narrative but his point obviously extended much further.  He was working in the tradition of the great propagandists.  Griffin took a scalpel to this call for cognitive warfare and was of course a victim of it as well.  Sunstein has since worked for the World Health Organization (WHO) on COVID psychological responses and other COVID committees.  It’s all one piece.

Sunstein’s wife is Samantha Power, Obama’s Ambassador to the United Nations and war hawk extraordinaire.  She gleefully promoted the U.S. destruction of Libya under the appellation of the “responsibility to protect,”  a “humane” cover for imperialism.  Now she is Biden’s Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), an arm of the CIA throughout the world.  It’s all one piece.

The merry-go-round goes round and round.

I have gone off on this slight tangent to emphasize how vast and interconnected are the players and groups on Team Cognitive Warfare.  They have been leading the league for quite some time and are hoping their game plan against Team Russia will keep them there.  So far they are winning, as Patrick Lawrence says:

Look at what has become of us. Most Americans seem to approve of these things, or at least are unstirred to object. We have lost all sense of decency, of ordinary morality, of proportion. Can anyone listen to the din of the past couple of weeks without wondering if we have made of ourselves a nation of grotesques?

It is common to observe that in war the enemy is always dehumanized. We are now face to face with another reality: Those who dehumanize others dehumanize themselves more profoundly.

Perhaps people are too ignorant to see through the propaganda. To have some group to hate is always “uplifting.” But we are all responsible for the consequences of our actions, even when those actions are just buying the propaganda and hating those one is told to hate. It is very hard to accept that the leaders of your own country commit and contemplate unspeakable evil deeds and that they wish to control your mind. To contemplate that they might once again use nuclear weapons is unspeakable but necessary if we are to prevent it.

I hope my fears are unfounded.  I agree with Gilbert Doctorow that the Ukraine-Russia war separates the sheep from the goats, that there is no middle ground.  This is not to celebrate war and the death of innocent people, but it does demand placing the blame squarely where it belongs and not trying to have it both ways.  People like him, John Mearsheimer, the late badly missed Stephen Cohen, Ray McGovern, Oliver Stone (see his 2016 film Ukraine on Fire), Scott Ritter, Pepe Escobar, Patrick Lawrence, Jack Matlock, Ted Postol, et al. are all cutting through the propaganda and delivering truth in opposition to all the lies.  They go gentle with fears of nuclear war, however, as if it is somewhat possible but highly unlikely, as if their deepest thoughts are unspeakable, for to utter them would be an act of despondency.

The consensus of the experts tends to be that the U.S. wishes to draw the Russians into a long protracted guerrilla war along the lines of its secret use of mujahideen in Afghanistan in 1979 and after. There is evidence that this is already happening. But I think the U.S. strategists know that the Russians are too smart for that; that they have learned their lesson; and that they will withdraw once they feel they have accomplished their goals. Therefore, from the U.S./NATO perspective, time is reasonably short and they must act quickly, perhaps by doing a false flag operation that will justify a drastic response, or upping the tempo in some other way that would seem to justify the use of nuclear weapons, perhaps tactical at first.

I appreciate the input of the Russia experts I mentioned above.  Their expertise dwarfs mine, but I disagree. Perhaps I am an excitable sort; perhaps I am one of those Patrick Lawrence refers to, quoting Carl Jung, as too emotional and therefore incapable of clear thinking. (I will leave the issue of this long held but erroneous western philosophical belief in the division of emotions and thoughts for another day.)  Perhaps I can’t see the obvious that a nuclear war will profit no one  and therefore it cannot happen. Yet Ted Postol, MIT professor of technology and international security, while perhaps agreeing that an intentional nuclear war is very unlikely, has been warning of an accidental one for many years.  He is surely right on that score and well worth listening to.

But either way, I am sorry to say, perhaps because my perspective is that of a generalist, not an expert, and my thinking is informed by art as much as social science and history, my antennae pick up a very disturbing message. A voice tells me that the danger is very, very real today.  It says:

Beware, we are on the edge of a nuclear abyss.












35 thoughts on “On the Edge of a Nuclear Abyss”

  1. Hello everyone…I was just contemplating the subject of fear…, if there is a global, nuclear, whatever catastrophe…, my greatest fear is the possibility of taking orders from some kind of emergency coordinator, dictator, organization or whatever! Evacuating and to where? The ‘sensationalism’ of barking out orders and directions for some people have greater importance than the implied agenda or action. It’s like people who become EMT’s, not for the sake of helping people. They simply like going fast with sirens blazing! Am I too critical? What have we seen over the past 2 years? The past 245 years!

  2. I would examine the idea of “use”

    Let’s say “Joe” has an old .38 revolver. It’s loaded, and covered with dust. Quite safe resting in his desk drawer. Is this weapon “in use”?

    I say “yes”. It creates some assurance in Joe that he can protect against a murderer/rapist/brigand…and presumably some doubt and reluctance in would-be criminals. This is a pretty good use…

    If Joe waves his gun around at people in the street – another “use”…the outcome is liable to be different, but it’s still a use, even if the weapon is never fired.

    And if Joe shoots – that’s another “use”.

    The same principles apply to atomic explosives. Since Alamogordo “the bomb” has been in constant use….primarily as a threat.

    There have been recently credible stories that the nazis plan to use a small nuke in Ukraine as a provocation to create consent for “NATO” (aka the nazis) to make war on Russia. Indeed, they certainly will, if they can. Their backs are to the sea, they’re delusional, and desperate, and they always double.

    1. “All options are on the table.” Walter is another use. It is a threat to use in our crazed world nuclear weapons. Even if nuclear weapons cannot do what people are told, have been told their whole lives, the threat and the fear created is real.

      1. Yes, Brother…and “use” also means making money for the MIC. They create thrilling “business opportunities”…like building vast underground shelters for men who have soft hands and have never worked a day.

        I assure you, however, that these infernal machines work. I have seen one detonated. They cause death. What they can’t do is “win a war”. I wish I believed otherwise, wish I believed they don’t work. They do.

        Ted Taylor, expert bomb design boffin, once pointed out that nobody who has tried to build them has ever failed to get a satisfactory “bang” on the first try.

      2. Good morning Art, here’s a quote from a nuclear watchdog; “I would say that the effort to decrease inequality in the world is at the core of dealing with the threat of nuclear war. We have to get the military-industrial-financial complex off people’s backs. If you have so much power concentrated in so few hands, and have such high levels of inequality, the people in power are blinded by their position. They are insulated from society’s problems. So gross inequality—economic and especially political—leads to sort of political stupidity. It could lead to annihilation. The ignorant masses are not the problem. It’s the ignorance and hubris at the top. It always is.”
        During an interview I watched recently, good ole Al Gore stated ‘a little’ inequality is good. Of course he didn’t say what ‘a little’ is.

        1. Hi joseph: first, I think the boomer generation was the first generation to be massively indoctrinated through the media. It’s important we question what is, as it was formulated in our early childhood.

          Personally, the struggle is with “civilization” as it’s been organized and injected into our sense of “reality”. This is the fundamental problem whether its inequality, war, slavery, poverty, imperialism, etc. It was institutionalized as “there’s no alternative” hundreds/thousands of years ago.

          “Anthropologist Marshall Sahlins has written: “The world’s most primitive people have few possessions, but they are not poor. Poverty is not a certain small amount of goods, nor is it just a relation between means and ends; above all it is a relation between people. Poverty is a social status. As such it is the invention of civilization.”
          ― Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization: Humanity’s Next Great Adventure

  3. Griffin’s *Cognitive Infiltration* is “required reading”. It’s difficult to imagine a book more important to our current predicament than that one. He clearly lays out the “battlefield of the mind” concept, and how crime syndicates like the Neocon group (and black nobility, Club of Rome…depending on how far down the rabbit hole you go) can not only blow up three skyscrapers in broad daylight, but then also GET AWAY WITH IT.
    Many who woke up during Covid have started to ask these bigger questions, “I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m a things-aren’t-adding-up-and-it’s-pretty-obvious theorist.” Still, in my view, the fact that we have not prosecuted the villains who blew up 3000 people on a random Tuesday (and then killed 6m Muslims) represents the end of humanity. We cannot exist much longer without resolving 9/11. And, to address this article, resolving 9/11 will stop those who are bringing us to the brink of nuclear war.

  4. If it’s any consolation Folks, the existence of death has yet to be proven.
    Dead bodies yes. There’s been billions of them. But a dead body is not death.
    Death itself, the state of non being or non awareness, is immeasurable and unverifiable by science or religion. It is the most private experience in the Cosmos.
    Time is the same. We can only exist, feel, and sense, the Now. The past is dead and the future a mere figment of our imaginations.
    That being said, Nuclear Armageddon still scares the shit out of me, because I have children and grandchildren. They have a human right to enjoy Life and grow old.

    1. I’m not sure Johnny if your being sarcastic or not.

      In the case of a “Nuclear Armageddon”, just one question: when did you ever experience such an “Armageddon”? I’ll assume we have no evidence of having died.

      As my mother use to say, worry is interest paid on a debt not due. Whether energy (which is what we are) continues (as physics claims with its laws) or not is really nothing to fret about. There are, however real and impending problems which we should be mindful of and do what we can.

    2. I try to embody some of my deepest thoughts into simple wisecracks –
      “It is more troublesome to be shot at than to be shot.”
      “Would you prefer to die or be killed?”
      “Nuclear war, if it saves one life, —————“

      1. Hi Tom…I appreciate the simple wisecrack. During a discussion about schools…(indoctrination centers)….one individual said, ‘well, a student can at least learn to read’. And so my question is, do we read what is truly important for the individual to become aware and to develop thinking, ideas that transcend the ordinary?

  5. Nuclear War
    I return to my fundamental questioning of WHY, or the cause and reason for the rapidly increasing generational obsession with the present , and corresponding lack of interest in either the future or the past. That this obsession and corresponding disregard exists, may be symbolised by the fact that not a single significant world leader has children or if they do, obviously wish they didn’t ! As for any notable connection to parents or ancestors, with very few exceptions, there is none. This is not just Western, Eastern or Civilisational, but generally universally human.
    I might add that my observation that national, cultural, or spiritual “Leadership” must exclude personal priorities, favourites, or chosen privileged ones, does NOT mean that these personal priorities, and preferred ones should not exist. The world is not comprised entirely of LEADERS ! Having, and then prioritising children, is a very fundamental prerequisite for life.
    Given this seemingly universal disregard for both future and past, and with decidedly “individual” interests and priorities especially by leaders and authorities in control of such possibilities, it would seem that Nuclear devastation, if not inevitable, is extremely likely. Once again, this is not an East/West consideration or a question of “Who started it?”, but a simple observation of general human preference or priority.

    1. Hi Tom…I think leaders and people who want to become leaders are immature, dysfunctional and simply stupid. A research psychologist once stated, while speaking about the dysfunctional family being the norm NOT the exception; you cannot expect a 3 year old to raise a 3 year old! So I think leaders are selfish, needy humans who can only consider what they THINK they need and want. Citizens from various contemporary societies accept the authorities and become very similar, socially indoctrinated and for some reason do not acknowledge what their similarities are as humans aside from the political and social indoctrination.
      We believe the lies and ignore any truths about what is under our veneer, our facade. We want humanity, sanity, compassion, empathy but we do not speak about this more widely. We don’t seem to be able to ‘observe’ ourselves as we go through our conditioned routines and thinking…, but later ‘Feel’ something is simply not quite as they could/should be. It’s amazing that millions of people listen to these idiots in suits and ties screaming ‘I want my way, I want my way’. Some researchers have said these creatures, public officials were abused children and have never recovered and perhaps do not even know they have been mentally and possibly physically abused. So they cannot think about the future or children since they are emotionally needy themselves. In some families, I have no doubt, the child must see the need to be responsible for the parent. And it would not surprise me if it is the male that is the most dysfunctional!

      1. Hello everyone…I was just reminded of animals kept in zoos for someone’s entertainment ?
        A recent quote from a friend: “War is deadly for all earthlings, Do you think non-humans are ever spared during military conflicts? “Warehousing endangered species sends the frightening subliminal message that it’s acceptable to spend money to view animals in enclosures while, for example, forests are being clear cut to make way for doomed livestock — depriving many of those same animals the freedom to live in their own habitats. This line of thinking brings to mind a time in 2013 when the Central Park Zoo euthanized a 27-year-old polar bear named “Gus” and the ‘New York Times’ had a field day mocking poor Gus as “neurotic.” I cannot imagine the fear, torture, anguish of the animals in Ukraine zoos ! The deciders are so narrow in understanding, so filled with anger and hatred, they do not imagine their own existence. And every 4 years…people grant legitimacy to this political insanity ! How in the hell can this happen ?

  6. When you are attempting to control eight billion people you need events that can be adjusted & manipulated during the lifecycle of the event, unintended consequences are minimized by this approach.
    The narrative was carefully controlled during the last two years by the threat of a dangerous pathogen, an actual pathogen would have been chaotic.
    An actual nuclear exchange is just not their modus-operandi, they are paranoid control freaks who realize that they cannot afford to make a silly mistake by choosing a tool that produces unintended consequences.
    Putin is one of their puppets, just remember how he paraded around a hospital in a hazmat suit during the early stages of operation virus.
    I would suggest that these events are carefully chosen for effectiveness after running numerous simulations on software such as the ‘sentient world simulation’ that can be updated in real time as the event unfolds:

  7. A great post Ed, and sadly I must agree with your assessment of the very real danger we face of nuclear war. These are very dangerous and frightening times indeed. We are currently graced by an irrational madness seemingly shared by not only the Western political class who shill for oligarchy, but also by much of the West’s completely brain-washed populations.

    As a counter-point to reading daily updates on the madness unfolding around us, I’ve been re-reading Lewis Mumford in the form of “The Myth of the Machine: Technics And Human Development.” Copyright 1966. I came across a prescient quote I’ll share after first setting up its context.

    Mumford first explains how our dream-life and visions “instructed” humanity from our beginnings, both inspiring human creativity on one hand, while also allowing us to fall prey to completely irrational beliefs and acts on the other. He describes how a girl in the Xosa tribe in Africa had an encounter with “spirits” who told her that her people could expel the murderous English colonizers by killing all of the Xosa’s own cattle and destroying their own millet harvest. These acts, the spirts assured, would result in the English leaving, and the cattle and millet magically regenerating in abundance. The vision was carried out and the result was the Xosa almost ceased to exist as a people due to mass starvation.

    In the quote that follows Mumford then goes on to compare the “instructions” the Xosa girl received from the spirit world with the received wisdom that fueled the super-power policy decisions of his era during the 1960’s.

    “The ‘instructions’ received by our military and political leaders for contriving atomic, bacterial, and chemical means of total human extermination have the same psychological status as the messages recorded by the Xosa girl: they are self-induced hallucinations that wantonly defy all the historic precepts of human experience. The fact that these dreams have been put forward under the pseudo-rational garb of advanced theoretic science and justified as a measure of national ‘survival’ does not disguise their bottom-less malignancy and irrationality, with its complete divorce from even an animal’s instinct for self-preservation. But unlike the pitiable mistake of the Xosa, the colossal kind of error, or ‘accident,’ that the Pentagon and the Kremlin have already neatly set the fuse for, would be beyond redemption.” – Lewis Mumford 1966

    Mumford was certainly not alone in recognizing that our human abilities at “tool making” had already by then far outstripped our collective ability to understand and manage those “visionary” yet often irrational and destructive aspects of our psychological makeup.

    Sadly and dangerously the voices of sanity like Mumford and others have been silenced. Instead we get war-gamed predictions and recommendations from the Rand Corporation on how to best cynically use the lives and deaths of Ukrainians and Russians to facilitate regime-change in Russia. As if it is all just a game – in the game-theory world of our war planners.

    As I reflect on my life experiences having just reached the age of 70, I remember well the so called “Cuban Missile Crisis” that took place when I was only ten years old. What stands out the most, comparing that period to our own, was that in 1962 we as a species at least still retained a deep enough connection to “reality” to be appropriately collectively terrified by the danger of extinction we faced. Not so today.

    I suspect that publicly voicing concern for the possibility of even ‘unintentional’ nuclear war, related to the unpredictably unfolding politically orchestrated events in Ukraine, would be labeled “fake news,” or “disinformation,” in today’s climate of fatuous official “fact-checking” and blatant 24/7 propaganda.

    We are clearly in the grip of a collective madness that has unfortunately moved incalculable “extermination levels” beyond the damage we were restricted to with only stone axes and arrowheads. Our current arsenal of “tools” clearly pose the danger of our total extinction when they are combined with the collective fantasies of our still “irrational” “wish fulfillment” dreams and our “self-induced hallucinations” of “our group” somehow cheating death through yet more violence.

  8. Some perspective from Karl Denninger on a nuclear war at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=245353 – it wouldn’t end human life, but we would be back in the 1800’s.
    As to the madness of our leadership – it is real – it’s actually demonic. I draw a parallel from the history of the Jewish wars as written by Josephus – upon the impending total destruction of Israel in 70 AD, the zealots and various other groups became insanely perverted and destructive by killing and torturing anyone who was still sane. The result is history.
    Conclusion – since we are governed now by humans acting as servants of Satan, the demonic act of nuclear war is a real possibility.
    The father of LIES is real, his servants are real and the potential for destruction is real – but it will not be total because God always has a remnant from which comes the rebuilding and restoration. That much is clear from the whole Bible – so that’s the good news after the bad. In essence that is what my website and library are all about, but few are interested.
    So what’s the lesson? We don’t learn from history what God is telling us consistently throughout history.
    Sad but true, folks!

  9. Ed, when first I saw this article’s title, I immediately thought, “Ed’s got it wrong”.

    I read it and found it to be brilliantly articulated. It covers enough ground to be “of a piece” as you say. However, I think we need to stay focused on what is going on under cover of these “crises”. I don’t fear a nuclear war. I never have even during the hottest times during the Cold War. Maybe I’m a fatalist at heart. But I think fear is our greatest enemy and the weapon of the power structure. Proactive action does not come from fear.

    Frankly, I’ve had some questions about the feasibility of nuclear weapons for a while. There is a fear factor, some refer to as MAD, Mutually Assured Deterrence. It has not stopped wars, just not nuclear wars. But I do think there are grounds for questioning the use of uranium, etc. to create a chain reaction that would envelop the globe. (I do think nuclear energy is real). I do think we have bombs that can cause massive destruction (in Afghanistan MOAB was used to raise the capability of destruction). I just have misgivings that a nuclear bomb can actually cause this. There are questions about what was used in WWII Japan versus Dresden, Germany where in the latter case much of the same destruction occurred.

    Anyway, this from Professor Piers Robinson on Global Research today is worth considering, (From COVID-19 to Ukraine: Bouncing from One Crisis to the Next and the Importance of Staying Focused): “We simply cannot afford to continue tumbling from one highly propagandised crisis to the next and allowing our emotions to be harnessed by those who wield political and economic power. Many people over the last two years have learned much about issues such as propaganda, mainstream media bias as well as the levels of corruption, or conflicts of interest, that exist in both national and global institutions. It is important those lessons are kept in focus and not clouded by events in the Ukraine. Now is the time for calm and rational assessments of the events we are living through and, more than ever, determined engagement with widening public understanding of the agendas that many now believe to have been underlying COVID-19.”

    1. Strategical nukes have changed the concept of MAD. In a sense, they’ve made the world a more dangerous place by justifying “cracking the lid” on pandora’s box. There still exists the inexorable slippery slope, but if you’re a Davos elite the possibility of nuking cities without destroying the planet might seem tenable.

      1. Andy, my first rule: Question Everything.

        I think those who ran the Covid Operation managed it without ever having (or needing) a “pathogen”. There’s no proof of a natural pathogen, nor any proof of transmission from person to person. They simply repackaged with a new label existing symptoms and let our life-long indoctrination about invisible particles that attack us do the rest. (Yes, people do get sick and do die. More have died since they’ve rolled out the mRNA injections and jabbed millions.)

        “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false” -CIA Director William Casey.

        So, about those nuclear weapons…just duck and cover.

    2. Hi Art: I have read a little about the idea that the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not real, and that the destruction in those cities was identical to that in Tokyo and Dresden. If so, that would be one of those conspiracies which seem impossible to conceal.

      But, as long as the only aggressive use of them was in those two cities, and the power of narrative wielded by those interested, as we have seen, is extreme, it does not seem entirely out of the range of possibility. I don’t recall the source of the idea or how credible it was, but I did find it an interesting concept.

      Obviously, it would not behoove Japan to make any revelation about the nature of the explosions, as it would be easy enough for the US to take out more cities whether by nuclear bomb or otherwise if Japan resisted the narrative.

      It would take quite a bit of investigation and plausible explanations for the first hand experiences of observers to provide a convincing argument. But, as with a virus, a story about a bomb might work as well as an actual bomb for those interested in promoting the idea that the US had possession of the ultimate weapon, and that “resistance is futile”.

      After all, those desiring to create such an explosion would want powerful evidence that the explosion, once started, would be limited, and not destroy the entire world. A narrative about the bomb might be easier to control.

      And regardless of the reality of the claims, the eternal object of the controllers was achieved: existential fear for all. It became an overriding theme of the 20th century.

      And now it enjoys a reprise in these latter days.

      1. Eddy below is a link to a rather extensive investigation.

        I don’t think it’s conclusive, but we live in a world of deception and so what we think we know should not be beyond question, particularly those matters that are used to manipulate and control. For a hundred years (or more) people have been deceived that something called a “pathogenic virus” exists, and yet there is no proof. Much of microbiology is barely hypothesis, which includes the Genome Project and its claims. Dr. Harold Hillman stated it best, Modern Medicine is Currently in Dire Straights. The limits of biology can be found in all the sciences.

        Here’s that link I promised.

    3. Your first instinct was actually correct Ed has got wrong,very very wrong

      Putin invades Ukraine and yet is somehow the victim!!!


      This is the psychopath 101 play book,blame the victim

      1. I don’t think that Ed was claiming that Putin is a “victim”. He does point out that this conflict did not spring up out of nowhere, with Putin suddenly deciding he wanted to invade Ukraine. If the US did not want this outcome, it had plenty of opportunity to avert it.

        But it seems our fearless misleaders have never met a war they didn’t like – especially if there are other things going on which it would be desirable to distract the public from observing. For example, the Covid narrative crumbling and the data regarding the safety and efficacy of the injected solutions trickling out into the open might make a war attractive to power-hungry psychopaths.

        But Ed’s main point, as far as I see, is that this development raises the potential for a nuclear holocaust which would make victims of us all.

        1. I should also mention the WHO pushing an international treaty to allow them to dictate “health-care” policies binding on supposedly sovereign nations as another item which the powers want to obscure in the fog of war cheerleading. No doubt there are others, including some I am not aware of.

  10. Similarly, I have for years felt that eventually nukes would be used again before industrial civilization collapses (coming soon to a planet near you). The psychopaths will have their way.

    Thank you for your writing. I appreciate it very much. I bought your book and am partway through it. Truly excellent work.

  11. I share your worry. I watched my mother’s father spin around his den arguing with Westmoreland and his friends McNamara and LeMay that the US should drop a nuclear bomb on Hanoi. There were 63 black and white framed photos he had taken from the B-29 that followed his squad as the firebombed Tokyo burning 100s of thousands to death. Americans do not understand how those in power think. It is frightening. Keith McHenry – co-founder of Food Not Bombs

  12. Good afternoon Edward. I think your fears, concerns are justified as my fears are. I base my fears, not on the Ukraine story but on what I have been reading about what I would call new era nukes. There must be a formal term for these; I don’t know. I think they are smaller scale nukes designed to work with some kind of new missile system being developed by the nice people at Lawrence Livermore…, if I understand all of this correctly. So if that’s the case, I’m sure the Insanity Battalion would like to test/experiment with their new weapons. As I have been saying for the past 2 years, I cannot provide tangible proof that the earth is not flat ! Many people are not paying attention to very much of anything!

Comments are closed.