|
||
Nuclear Proliferation: A Mother's Legacy
The Cold War Distorted The World's Capacity To Work Together
Change is a constant. Sometimes the world changes imperceptibly, slowly, and sometimes it can come in a flash. The world is now poised for changes for the better. But let us never forget that the danger that sits over our head arrived in a flash. At precisely 5:30 AM on the 16th of July 1945 in a place in the desert of New Mexico, named Journey of the Dead Man or Jornada del Muerto, that flash of the Trinity Test, caused Dr. Robert Oppenheimer to recite the famous verse from the Bhagavad-Gita, "I am death, the shatterer of worlds." The world changed on that day. The extent of that change was demonstrated shortly thereafter in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It should not surprise us then that the first resolution of the General Assembly on January 24, 1946, called for creating a Commission designed to help obtain the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons and of all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction.
The Cold War distorted the world's capacity to work together to accomplish this goal. I am not an expert in politics, treaties, or international law, but I like to think I am an expert in being a caring mother. There are several billion other such experts throughout the world, and I believe I speak in unison with their hearts as well, when I say, The Cold War is over. Let's not pass on the legacy of these horrific devices to our children. It is time we really changed and began working together on real common purposes. If for no other reason, let's do it for our kids! Cooperation with one another is no longer an option; Cooperation amongst nations is no longer an option. Cooperation with nature is no longer an option. These are all necessities.
Does anyone think their country should rule the world and make everyone live like them? Does anyone think that the rules of the sand box where we learned to share can be tossed aside when it comes to international relations? Nature, Mother Nature, also has her rules; we must quickly learn to live by them. Can we protect the oceans, the rainforests, or the climate without real global cooperation? How about a sense of reality and humility once in a while? Where is our sense of human security? With half the human family living on less than two dollars per day, and the Millennium Development Goals so easily met with a mere fraction of what is spent on militaries, can we fulfill our basic sense of compassion and justice without a new spirit of cooperation? Have we not recently seen that the metrics of unbridled selfishness lead to the folly of loneliness and spiritual poverty? The economic crisis has shown us that if we worship our unending appetites of greed our system will itself fail. We simply must establish some sense of balance and proportion. A new sense of cooperation amongst all peoples of all races and religions is a new necessity if we are to live with any sense of human values.
Can we rid the world of nuclear weapons without cooperation? And here we need A CHANGE... akin to the flash of the beginning of the nuclear age. We need a wake-up call as clear as the first explosion itself. It is for us here to assert that call.
Would it have been correct to say, "Let's treat the slaves better and that will bring stability and justice." People did say that and they were wrong. Can we rid ourselves of the threat posed by nuclear weapons by saying they can be held responsibly, reliably and I dare quote our military planners by saying safely by some and not others? Can we prevent their spread while we rely upon them? Can you convince your children not to smoke while puffing on a cigar? The whole world is actually relying on the security of each of the weakest links in the security chain. All are all downwind should any make a fatal miscalculation, be subject to a computer error, or simply be subject to human fallibility. I do not have a great deal of confidence in the situations in South Asia or the Middle East when I remember that the summer before last a half dozen US nuclear weapons were unaccounted for an entire afternoon!
Nuclear weapons are more of a problem than any problem they seek to solve. They cannot be used against non nuclear weapons states, what could be more outrageous? They cannot be used against nuclear armed states, that would be suicidal. They have no value against terrorists. The Berlin wall came down, the wall of apartheid came down. It is time to tear down the wall of nuclear apartheid.
On April 5, 2009, in Prague, President Obama stated in no uncertain terms that the United States is committed to a nuclear weapons free world. He stated that "moral leadership is more powerful than any weapon." I agree and we are not alone...The Secretary General of the United Nations set forth a bold agenda to help us get there on UN Day October 24, 2008, and we believed the United Nations when in 2000 at the Review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, they made an unequivocal undertaking to obtain the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
Now is the time to be bold. No one could have imagined a year ago that the presidents of Russia and U.S. would openly state together that they intend to work to achieve a nuclear weapons free world, but they did. Now is the time to work without cynicism, doubt, or fear. I want to tell my children that I met the men and woman who worked to free us all from the terror of nuclear weapons, the men and woman who decided to change history and save history. Yes we know the hurdles are enormous, but we also know that with passion, intelligence, moral conviction, not to mention several billion passionate Mothers... greatness is possible. I join the United Nations in affirming with three simple words we need to hold dear to succeed. "Yes we can. May Peace be with you!
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
In the midst of a clearly heartfelt article opposing nuclear weapons, the author states the very obvious reason they are necessary:
"They cannot be used against nuclear armed states, that would be suicidal."
It would only be suicidal if the other state is, indeed, nuclear armed.
Since we have virtually no control over proliferation, the best way to protect our children is to retain our own nuclear arsenal, so that present and future nuclear powers will always be dissuaded from attacking us.
I didn't realize that Ms. Brinkley was in favor of nuclear weapons, but there we have it. Glad to have her on board.
Deterrence requires only a couple nukes.
Eliminating Nuclear power, will delay proliferation.
But someday, We may end up with:
Every Sovereign nation will have at least one 2 nukes.
One test to prove they have it.
And one for deterrence.
I don't like it, but human nature, and Recent US Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, while N Korea gets aid,
indicates that any nation without nukes,
wont be sovereign for long.
Research
I was reading about the first Pork listed awhile back that inolved funds for reducing the odor of pig poo plus research that was slated for using pig manure for Fuel.
If you head back to this page what are your thoughts on it?
on august,6th 1945 the world changed forever. i applaued ms. brinkley's fervor,an dintelligent article.it is an oxymoron,that the cold war was our safety net.for all those years. you and i ms. brinkley are old enough to remember the cuban missle crisis.j.f.k.,and premiere kruschev handeled a very scarry situation with extreme caution.i am glad for the people of eastern europe tha the wall fell. are dillima is their are way more fanatical types out there that have this weapon. their lies our dillima.unlike mr.obama ,and mr, medved.these extremisits will throw caution to the wind.i am afraid at all costs.because of the exterme jealousy,and hatred for america.the need for power by fear,by these extreme fanatics.it wilnever be accomplished,and catalouged.the only way to do this is have all the weapons destroyed by the americans. the big guy is not going to let us destroy the beauty that he created for us to enjoy. he will prevail.by prayer,or divine intervention.have enough faith,and make sure your kids see that faith.
Um please tell me again why her opinion matters...espically on this issue. I mean couldn't she start her bloging career off with a topic a little less technical? To me this is the same as Prejean speaking. Just look pretty, I can do without the public opinions. No hate...just sayin...
you are obviously sexist. Unlike you many people have more than one talent and one's beauty or lack there off is not a measure of intelligence. "No hate..." Please, just by bringing that up you admitted to it. Clean your own house before you attack someone else because you are obviously dealing with serious insecurities.
A well written article, Bhagavad-Gita, sensible. I couldn't have written it better.
Well that must indicate high standards. But I looked at her blog for the pictures
Nukes are insane! How many times do we have to go over this?????
Nukes lead to proliferation leads to loose nukes leads to mushroom clouds leads to global thermonuclear clear war.
The end of all life.
For electricity we can get from solar and BioChar.
Nuclear Power IS INSANE.
My profile provides all the proof any sane person could want.
BTW nukes as built today can provide only 13 years of the worlds energy, nukes waste will last 1 million years and eat up quadrillions of dollars of lands. Nukes energy costs many times solar and biochar.
you are basing your assumptions on old technologies that are no longer Valid and with new technologies out it further minimizes the dangers
You also failed to discuss the Benefit of irradiating food.
Irradiation has been scientifically proven to improve the quality and safety of the global food supply by reducing spoilage and eliminating pests and bacteria.
great, the last remaining survivors of global thermonuclear war will have irradiated food to eat.
I am quite aware of the state of the art in Nuke power, and it still leads to global thermonuclear war.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html
Let me show you proof that your data is inaccurate
A 2005 OECD comparative study showed that nuclear power had increased its competitiveness over the previous seven years. The principal changes since 1998 were increased nuclear plant capacity factors and rising gas prices. The study did not factor in any costs for carbon emissions from fossil fuel generators, and focused on over one hundred plants able to come on line 2010-15, including 13 nuclear plants. Nuclear overnight construction costs ranged from US$ 1000/kW in Czech Republic to $2500/kW in Japan, and averaged $1500/kW. Coal plants were costed at $1000-1500/kW, gas plants $500-1000/kW and wind capacity $1000-1500/kW.
OECD electricity generating cost projections for year 2010 on - 5% discount rate
nuclear coal gas
Finland 2.76 3.64 -
France 2.54 3.33 3.92
Germany 2.86 3.52 4.90
Switzerland 2.88 - 4.36
Netherlands 3.58 - 6.04
Czech Rep 2.30 2.94 4.97
Slovakia 3.13 4.78 5.59
Romania 3.06 4.55 -
Japan 4.80 4.95 5.21
Korea 2.34 2.16 4.65
USA 3.01 2.71 4.67
Canada 2.60 3.11 4.00
Now if those projections were for say 50 years from now your comments would be more accurate.
Irradiation is not nuclear power.
So you are out of defenses for nuke power?
BTW irradiation isn't completely safe:
*An Indian study found that four of five children who ate a diet of 60% freshly irradiated wheat developed chromosomal changes in their blood that are precursors to cancer. "
http://www.organicconsumers.org/irrad/InducedRadioactivity.cfm
My god dude it's clear that you have an agenda, and the more you blabber on here the more you turn everyone off. Nobody likes to be forcefed, so chill out, cuz you're just shooting yourself in the foot.
I do enjoy our conversation and appreciate the Additional information you have provided to people.
Nuclear power though I do feel has its place and its positives with time will reduce the threats that we can face with it.
I know it is not the end all be all of our energy fix but the possibilites of what nuclear power and its research can do alot of poitives for tomorrow.
Fusion MAY have a place, but even the Fusion lovers say it will be 30-50 years before the first Fusion plant goes on line.
I am very interested in Fusion drive for space travel, since the fuel is everywhere.
The only safe place for a Fission reactor is the at the core of the planet, where there is one.
And we already have a free Fusion reactor in the sky, with optical energy transmission distributed all over the world, no wires!
Mana from heaven.
Just bolts some panels on your roof for free energy, forever.
What are we waiting for?
I had this discussion with my 8 & 10 yr olds last night! They asked "What is a Nuke?" they got the term from some video game; They were appalled and confused that anyone would actually be stupid enough to make so many weapons that could destroy the world 10 times over; so powerful that we really can't use them w/out causing massive irreparable damage to the planet. Yes we are THAT stupid.
Sadly, I have to agree with the previous commenter; it is Pandora's Box, it can't go away now that the knowledge is here.
Recycling them sounds like a almost too good an idea to actually happen! I'd like to research more about the European Nuclear Energy plants.
Here is some information that you maybe interested in
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html
Apart from Chernobyl, no nuclear workers or members of the public have ever died as a result of exposure to radiation due to a commercial nuclear reactor incident. Most of the serious radiological injuries and deaths that occur each year (2-4 deaths and many more exposures above regulatory limits) are the result of large uncontrolled radiation sources, such as abandoned medical or industrial equipment. (There have also been a number of accidents in experimental reactors and in one military plutonium-producing pile - at Windscale, UK, in 1957, but none of these resulted in loss of life outside the actual plant, or long-term environmental contamination.)
It should be emphasised that a commercial-type power reactor simply cannot under any circumstances explode like a nuclear bomb.
To achieve optimum safety, nuclear plants in the western world operate using a 'defence-in-depth' approach, with multiple safety systems supplementing the natural features of the reactor core. Key aspects of the approach are:
high-quality design & construction
equipment which prevents operational disturbances developing into problems
redundant and diverse systems to detect problems, control damage to the fuel and prevent significant radioactive releases
provision to confine the effects of severe fuel damage to the plant itself.
Nuclear power plants are designed with sensors to shut them down automatically in an earthquake, and this is a vital consideration in many
parts of the world
.
The bottom line is There is nothing that is 100 percent Safe there are dangers with everything we do in Life.
The important thing is to understand and minimize the chances of there being an accident no matter what is being worked on Constructed etc.
Nuclear power versus othr forms of Energy in terms of Accidents
Safety relative to other energy sources
Many occupational accident statistics have been generated over the last 40 years of nuclear reactor operations in the US and UK. These can be compared with those from coal-fired power generation. All show that nuclear is a distinctly safer way to produce electricity. Two simple sets of figures are quoted in the Table below and that in the appendix. A major reason for coal's unfavourable showing is the huge amount which must be mined and transported to supply even a single large power station. Mining and multiple handling of so much material of any kind involves hazards, and these are reflected in the statistics.
Comparison of accident statistics in primary energy production.
(Electricity generation accounts for about 40% of total primary energy) Fuel Immediate fatalities
1970-92 Who? Normalised to deaths
per TWy* electricity
Coal 6400 workers 342
Natural gas 1200 workers & public 85
Hydro 4000 public 883
Nuclear 31 workers 8
The above is for the USA and UK combined
proliferation.
Global thermonuclear war.
That's the future of Nuclear power.
Too bad you are paid to promote nukes.
Have you no conscious?
My profile gives ample proof that nukes are insane and solar and BioChar are the way to go.
You haven't read it.
For Proof of how Safe Nuclear Energy is all one has to do is think no further then our Nuclear Submarines and Ships.
It of course does not mean it is fool proof and there are not dangers involved but the fact remains with the proper training (True of even operating a Chain Saw or a lawn mower) the Chances of Nuclear catastrophe is minimal.
Chernobyl was caused by Two factors.
1st was the fact it was poorly designed at the onset.
2nd It was poorly and improperly run
the combination of both lead to the disaster
Three Mile Island was Caused do to Human neglect and not paying attention to the warnings that were given to the workers.
IF they would have done as the Equipment and their training told them to do the Accident would have Been prevented.
Nuke submarines sit just off the Atlantic coast.
They sank.
So have half a dozen nuke sub,
not very safe, huh?
Proliferation from nuke power, for instance Korea's, India and Pakistan, and our fears of Iran,
Prove more nuke power means more and sooner terrorist rogue state mushroom clouds,
Possibly leading to global thermonuclear war.
Nuke Power is INSANE>
See my profile for proof.
Solar and BioChar can supply all our energy needs cheaper, faster, and infinitely safer.
You know nothing about nuke power.
Your Profile only has the Information You want to put in there. It does not make it inaccurate but it does not at the same time Show the real story.
I found this and you may find it of Interest
OECD electricity generating cost projections for year 2010 on - 5% discount rate
nuclear coal gas
Finland 2.76 3.64 -
France 2.54 3.33 3.92
Germany 2.86 3.52 4.90
Switzerland 2.88 - 4.36
Netherlands 3.58 - 6.04
Czech Rep 2.30 2.94 4.97
Slovakia 3.13 4.78 5.59
Romania 3.06 4.55 -
Japan 4.80 4.95 5.21
Korea 2.34 2.16 4.65
USA 3.01 2.71 4.67
Canada 2.60 3.11 4.00
The other Factor to Consider is that With the Improved technology that woudl be installed it will also make the cost less in the long run plus with Current and develioping technologies there will be next to no Nuclear waste since it will be recycled and made into other products that can be used.
Other then in regards though to Nuclear power I have a feeling there is alot we do agree on:}
I want to write carefully here. This is someone who has a nice hope: it even inspires nice,if vapid comments like ,"Maby if caring mothers were policy experts,we wouldn't be in this postion..." and ,"You do not want to mess with caring moms."
Unfortunately,bot of these responses are Boolean(symbolic) logic free. Unanimous responses which require suspicious groups to lay themselves open to potential destruction are pretty much lacking in this world-and deservedly so. Still,if one is to quote Oppie's epigram,it might be fair to al so quote Speaker Tom Read's;"He never opens his mouth without detracting from the sum of human knowlede."
Ms. Brinkley,
Nuclear weapons and proliferation worries can be taken care of through nuclear waste recycling. One in ten of our light bulbs in the United States are powered by a former Soviet nuclear weapon. Recycling projects are a proven and effective way to rid the planet of nuclear weapons. However, since Jimmy Carter made it illegal to do this in America in 1977, only Germany, France, Britain, and Japan practice this technology. Instead of protesting nuclear power as you do with your Tooth Fairy project, I hope you realize that you can easily fulfill your goals listed above with nuclear power.
And on that Tooth Fairy Project -- http://www.nei.org/filefolder/toothfairypeerreview_0706.pdf
Keep learning.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows" - George Orwell, 1984
Why are we afraid of the Iranian nuclear power tech,
If it's not the same as Bomb tech.
Korea, India, Pakistan
all prove that
Nuke power = Mushrooms clouds sooner and more often.
Nuke power is Insane.
Please read my profile and the links.
We don't need to rick Global Thermonuclear War
For energy.
Nuckear Power is safe and a smart way to go. it is one of the Flaws of the Democratic party to be listening to the Far left and others and their vehemence over nuclear power.
Nuclear power does not nor should it be a sole source of power but a means to supplement other forms.
"Cooperation amongst nations is no longer an option. Cooperation with nature is no longer an option. These are all necessities."
Christie - I couldn't agree more... our survival depends on it.
P.S. I Love you!
Waste BioChar and 3 cent Solar can supply all the energy we need. See my profile.
Revolutionary alternatives will be safer, faster and less expensive than nuclear power.
Breakthrough technologies will rapidly make possible future electric and hybrid cars that need no fuel or external battery charge.
The cars can turn into power plants when parked. Imagine vehicles that need no fuel and pay for themselves - by wirelessly selling power to the local utility.
This will become a cost-competitive alternative to building new coal and nuclear power plants.
It reflects one application of new technologies that tap energy sources never yet commercialized - such as ambient heat, Zero Point Energy, and hydrinos.
Scientists will be understandably skeptical until independent laboratory validation takes place.
That is on the horizon, as is production of self-powered generators - as well as demonstration devices for schools and universities.
See http://www.chavaenergy.com for more information concerning magnetic motors and generators, and self powered internal combustion engines that utilize hydrinos.
These technologies are inherently inexpensive. They have surprising potential to supersede nuclear power and accelerate reversal of our economic and energy concerns.
"I am not an expert in politics, treaties, or international law, but I like to think I am an expert in being a caring mother."
Bout the only pertinent thing said in the whole article. This article is about on par with those old Miss America responses....."and I want to end world hunger......".
Who says that we can't nuke a non-nuclear power? If they attack us with bio or chem weapons they can expect to get nuked. Our national policy dictates this as our response to any WMD attack.
So who is going to attack us with bio or chemical weapons? Canada, Mexico....Alaska??? Have you noticed we are surrounded by a lot of water. Get out of the bomb shelter you have been hiding for the last 60 years.
The President should first call for a 50% reduction in the arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, that would not only be a beginning but very possibly be accepted due to the cost of maintaining this insanity of such overkill in our collective arsenals nearly 18,000 strategic warheads averaging more than 1 Megaton or equal to 1,000,000 tons of just the explosive power not to mention the radiation and deadly gamma rays...
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
