CrossTalk: Talk of limited Nuclear war? who is being agressive?

[newthinking]

Excellent and thoughtful round-table with a variety of voices.

Please don't dismiss it because it plays on RT if you want to get outside the narratives this is a reasonable discussion to listen to.

4 Nato generals have advocated limited nuclear war. Maybe it is bluff, but should the idea be unchallenged?

[leveymg]

1. I remember Reagan Admin advise on surviving limited nuclear war.

Get a shovel, dig a hole , cover with an old door, and cover with six feet of earth. Not kidding.

[KoKo]

2. K&R...I miss "Discussion" ...so much

the kind we used to have some, way back time, here in our usa media before the "Deregulation" took place and citizens lost their voice and control. Great Watch/Discussion!

Thanks~!

[Journeyman]

3. I'm loath to belabor paranoid perspectives, but Orwell's world of "1984" is . . .

the result of limited nuclear war.

From Emmanuel Goldstein's The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, chapter 3:

Although the Party, according to its habit, claims the invention for itself, atomic bombs first appeared as early as the nineteen-forties, and were first used on a large scale about ten years later. At that time some hundreds of bombs were dropped on industrial centres, chiefly in European Russia, Western Europe, and North America. The effect was to convince the ruling groups of all countries that a few more atomic bombs would mean the end of organized society, and hence of their own power. Thereafter, although no formal agreement was ever made or hinted at, no more bombs were dropped. All three powers merely continue to produce atomic bombs and store them up against the decisive opportunity which they all believe will come sooner or later.

There is no issue more pressing, no condition more demanding, than our need to rid ourselves of nuclear weaponry. And no condition more relentlessly intractable, sad to say.