THE FINAL SOLUTION FOR ISRAEL

As Gaza Starves, Netanyahu Pledges To Expand The “War”. According To Some Sources, This Is Being Done With President Trump’s Blessing. This Announcement Comes At A Time When Starvation In Gaza Has Reached The Tipping Point.

On Tuesday, August 4th, reports began to appear in Israeli media that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intends to launch a more “aggressive” military operation against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which will end with Israeli occupation of the territory. According to these same sources, this is being done with President Trump’s blessing. This announcement comes at a time when starvation in Gaza has reached the tipping point and there is the highest level of famine, while countries besides the United States increasingly criticize Israel’s actions and demand a resolution to this grim chapter in history. Netanyahu, however, instead of showing concern for international pressure or the impact this has on his American patrons, is solidifying power, including illegally firing the Attorney General who has been prosecuting him. With the notable exceptions of Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene, who became the first Republican Representative to call Israel’s actions genocide, the ruling party in the United States is unfazed and is even doubling down, with the Trump Administration attempting [and then reversing] to tie state and local disaster relief funds to support for Israel, while a large number of Congressional Republicans just went to Israel and were photographed with Netanyahu, who has an outstanding international warrant for war crimes. It should be undeniable at this point that Israel’s objectives in Gaza are genocidal. It is not just the government: a new poll showed that roughly 80% of Israel Jews are at least largely unconcerned about famine in Gaza. All of this notwithstanding, our corrupt and fanatical governing class is determined that Americans be as culpable for this crime as possible. It is past time to take every possible action to end Israel’s genocide, feed Gaza, and remove the Likud government from power. However, despite increasing public criticisms from new quarters, it seems the policy of the “civilized world” will be to support or at least remain neutral towards Israel until there is greater mass death among the Palestinians of Gaza and those who remain are restricted to an even smaller concentration camp.

From the start of Israel’s war on Gaza we have been flooded with propaganda about 10/7 itself, Israel’s goals and actions, and the entire history of Israeli oppression of Palestinians. Much of it was of surprisingly poor quality, as we have learned that Israel was never actually good at propaganda, the American and British media just cover for them to an incredible extent. They have, as with any propaganda campaign, also relied on public ignorance about the workings of human affairs. For example, many have claimed Israel has been going “easy” on Gaza and that no other power would show this degree of restraint following an attack, despite that Israel’s behavior has been among the most unrestrained of any state in modern history. Israel was bombing at roughly the fastest sustainable rate it was capable of, when you figure that pilots need to sleep and planes need to be reloaded and maintained and that sort of thing. It is said that in the first 13 months of this conflict Israel dropped more munitions on Gaza than were used in entire Second World War. Though they have murdered as many Gazan journalists as possible and have prohibited foreign journalists from entering, a surreptitious video was recently taken of Gaza City from the air, and the scale of destruction is unprecedented:

Much of the public for some reason believes that genocide is something one can just decide to do, not something which takes an enormous amount of work and planning. As genocide scholar Mark Kersten recently explained, genocide is a process, not an event,

“Genocide is not perpetrated instantaneously. It does not ‘just happen’. Rather, those who seek to commit genocide must prepare their population to either support violence or to turn a blind eye to it…

In part because human beings have an innate aversion to harming others and participating in atrocities, genocide also takes on insidious forms, what some call “slow violence”…This lack of instant violence – often accompanied by continued births and parts of the population surviving – is often used to deny genocidal violence.

It is perhaps instructive to imagine the amount of work that would goes into two people killing one person and then disposing of the body, but on an industrial scale. By any method one would use, and whether or not one leaves corpses lying around, to instruct one large body of men towards the extermination of as many of a population of 2 million as possible is an enormous undertaking which takes years, particularly when you want the amount of plausible deniability- or in this case implausible deniability, that allowed Israel to go through the first 20 or so months of this with the word “genocide” remaining taboo in most “respectable” circles in the powerful “Western” countries. Further, the human instinct for survival is great, as seen by the willingness of Gazans to brave indiscriminate gunfire to grab bags of flour. Starvation is a slow and miserable process, particularly as any society starts with quite a lot of stored food and will ultimately kill their livestock, eat the seeds they intended to plant, hunt for insects, peel the bark off of trees, and boil their leather belts for food; hunger will drive humans to such lengths for survival that during the siege of Jerusalem a woman killed, cooked, and ate her own baby, and was so driven to madness by hunger that she saved half of him to present to partisans who would inevitably be attracted to the smell of meat and come to take it.

Time is running out for Gaza and there is every indication that the Netanyahu regime intends to make things worse instead of better, even if they do let in a nominal amount of food to provide themselves with an alibi. International law, always fragile, is collapsing under the weight of Israel’s genocide which is backed and enabled by the powers that consider themselves to be world police. America’s political leaders are determined to involve all American’s in these crimes and put the guilt onto the entire population, following Israel into perdition. It is time for a radically different course: the world must come together to stop Israel and save what people of Gaza can still be saved. Given the scale of Israel’s well-documented crimes, supporting an international invasion force to overthrow the Likud regime and protect the Palestinians is at this point a moderate position. By committing genocide Israel has lost its place among the nations of the world: the only question now is how many more they bring down with them.

ISRAEL IS A LIABILITY – NOT AN ALLY

The American Regime And It’s People Are Paying Mightily For Israel’s Reckless Policies. My People Are “Starting To Hate Israel.” That’s What President Donald Trump Reportedly Told A Prominent Jewish Donor Recently.

His remark wasn’t just a political aside; it was a warning. As images of starvation and devastation from Gaza flood American screens, even Trump has privately acknowledged the reality of “real starvation.” A shift is underway, and it is reshaping the foundations of American politics and foreign policy.

Once-unquestioning support for Israel on the American right is beginning to erode. MAGA-aligned voices—from Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who labeled Israel’s war in Gaza a “genocide,” to populist influencers like Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson—are now publicly challenging the American–Israeli relationship. Bannon has observed that Israel has “very little support” among the under-30 MAGA base. Carlson, in an interview with progressive host Ana Kasparian, went further: “They [Israel] are not allowed to use my tax dollars to bomb churches,” he declared, accusing Tel Aviv of war crimes and questioning continued American military aid.

This growing skepticism reflects a deeper structural problem in the America–Israel relationship: a classic case of moral hazard. Israel operates with the expectation that Washington will foot the bill—politically, financially, and militarily—regardless of how destabilizing or damaging its actions may be. Israeli leaders have repeatedly defied American warnings, expanded illegal settlements, and abandoned even the pretense of a two-state solution with the Palestinians, all while receiving billions in unconditional aid and carte blanche diplomatic cover.

As former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said back in 2011, Israel is an “ungrateful ally” that gives “nothing in return” for American guarantees, military support, and intelligence sharing. Generals David Petraeus and James Mattis, both former commanders of the American Central Command, have likewise warned that Israel’s policies directly undermine American interests in the region, inflame anti-American sentiment, and fuel recruitment for extremist groups.

Yet, Israel’s leaders continue to act with impunity, confident that the United States will absorb the political and strategic fallout. That is not the mark of a healthy alliance. It is exploitation.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Israel’s recent actions toward Iran. Despite explicit warnings from Washington, Israeli forces launched a surprise attack on Iran on June 13th, hitting nuclear, military, and civilian sites, and killing senior commanders, scientists, and hundreds of civilians, including children. The timing was no accident: the strikes came just as American diplomats were reportedly on the verge of a breakthrough in nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

The fallout was immediate, and its costs to the United States extended far beyond diplomacy, striking at the heart of American strategic and material security. For example, in rushing to defend Israel during the 12-day war, the United States depleted roughly a quarter of its entire stockpile of THAAD missile interceptors, a vital component of America’s high-end missile defense network. These interceptors are not easily replaced; experts estimate it could take up to eight years to replenish the supply. For a country increasingly focused on deterring China, this is not burden-sharing. It is free riding by Israel, and it leaves America less secure.

And what was gained? Despite triumphalist claims that Iran’s nuclear program was “obliterated,” the reality is murky. The fate of Iran’s enriched uranium and advanced centrifuges remains unknown, and Tehran has expelled international inspectors while embracing a posture of nuclear ambiguity, mirroring Israel’s own opaque doctrine. Far from eliminating the challenge, the attacks have reinforced a hard truth: Short of a full-scale American invasion, there is no military solution to Iran’s nuclear program. Without inspectors or boots on the ground, its status is fundamentally unverifiable. Only diplomacy—long preferred by Trump—offers a path to lasting and verifiable limits on Iran’s nuclear activities.

Moreover, despite advanced American and Israeli air defenses, dozens of Iranian missiles broke through, inflicting the worst damage Israeli cities have seen in decades. Rather than projecting strength, the war revealed deep vulnerabilities. Even leading voices on the right are rejecting the triumphalist spin: Bannon asserted that the ceasefire was needed “to save Israel” as it took “brutal hits” and ran low on defenses, while Trump acknowledged that Israel got hit “very hard.” Far from boosting American deterrence, the Israeli war on Iran drained critical American resources, exposed strategic gaps, and entangled America in yet another foreign conflict.

Worse still, Israel’s ambitions don’t end with Iran. Its most hawkish advocates in Washington are now floating escalatory military action against Syria and even NATO ally Turkey. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders have their eyes set on annexing the West Bank and fully occupying Gaza, moves that would further destabilize the region. These reckless objectives threaten to entangle the United States in a cascade of endless wars, isolate it diplomatically, and drain resources and credibility better spent countering real strategic threats. Once again, Israel will expect Washington to pick up the tab—politically, financially, and militarily.

All of this is unfolding as global headlines denounce American complicity in Israel’s war on Gaza, widely seen as genocidal and driven by ethnic cleansing. Around the world, public opinion is shifting sharply against Washington. Trust in the United States is collapsing at a time when it can least afford it, just as it seeks to rally global allies and compete with rising powers like China and Russia.

In this strategic context, the comparison often made between Israel and American partners like Ukraine or Taiwan simply falls apart. Iran is not a great power rival, and Israel is not on the frontlines of a global contest. The American military assesses that Iran’s military posture is defensive, and its nuclear program—while a concerning proliferation risk—is aimed at deterrence, not aggression. Yet for over four decades, Washington has treated Iran as a primary adversary, fixating on a mid-sized, conventionally weak country with no nuclear weapons and a stagnant economy. This misplaced obsession—driven by Israeli pressure and domestic politics—has undermined American diplomatic leverage and distracted from the real challenges of Great Power Competition.

At the same time, Israel continues to prioritize its own interests with little regard for America’s strategic concerns. While Washington calls for global alignment against Russia and China, Israel maintains ties with both powers. It has refused to sanction Russia. It has deepened commercial ties with Beijing, allowing a Chinese state-owned company to operate the Haifa port—used by the American Navy—despite warnings from American officials about espionage risks. Chinese investment in Israel’s tech and cyber sectors has surged. In effect, Israel safeguards its own flexibility on the world stage while pressuring Washington to forfeit its diplomatic options in the Middle East.

Indeed, Israel has consistently opposed American engagement with other regional powers—particularly Iran and, at times, Saudi Arabia—on balanced terms. Unlike competitors like China and Russia, which maintain relations with all sides to maximize influence, Israel pressures the United States to adopt rigid, zero-sum approaches that shut down diplomatic avenues and heighten the risk of war. This is not the behavior of a responsible ally. It reflects a pattern of coercive dependence in which Israel seeks to constrain American policy while securing unrestrained freedom of action for itself.

This pattern has played out for decades, with devastating consequences. Since 9/11, America’s entanglement with Israel’s hardline agenda has fueled a series of disastrous interventions. In 2002, Benjamin Netanyahu stood before Congress and “guaranteed” that invading Iraq would bring “enormous positive reverberations” across the Middle East. The reality was catastrophe: hundreds of thousands killed, the rise of ISIS, and an emboldened Iran.

These misadventures have cost trillions of dollars, stretched America’s capacities thin, and damaged Washington’s diplomatic standing. China’s successful brokering of a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran highlighted just how far the American regime has fallen from its once central role as a regional peacemaker.

Even more corrosive is the collapse of America’s moral authority. By defending Israel’s worst excesses—including apartheid policies and the horrific onslaught in Gaza—Washington is no longer seen as a champion of human rights, but as an enabler of extreme oppression. A foreign policy that sacrifices both national interests and democratic ideals at the altar of an extreme client state is not just irrational, it is strategically untenable.

It is long past time for a strategic reset. Israel is not the indispensable ally it is often portrayed to be, but a regional actor pursuing narrow objectives with little regard for the costs imposed on the United States. No serious partner would repeatedly push the American regime to choose between its principles and another ruinous war. Unconditional support for Israel has produced one debacle after another, leaving America poorer, weaker, and more isolated.

A realignment of American policy is urgently needed. No alliance should be unconditional, especially one that undermines American diplomacy, security, and global standing. A foreign policy rooted in restraint, realism, and responsibility would condition aid on Israeli behavior and reassert American freedom of action in the Middle East. Washington should engage with all major regional powers based on national interest, not ideological rigidity. Leveraging American influence to secure compromises from Israel, such as halting settlement expansion or ending the Gaza blockade, would not only ease anti-American sentiment but also serve Israel’s own long-term security.

Failing to change course will only further empower hardliners—in Tel Aviv, Tehran, and Washington—who thrive on endless conflict. America must choose: Continue down a path of costly entanglement and strategic decline, or chart a new course anchored in sovereignty, balance, and hard-nosed diplomacy.

CALLS TO “NUKE GAZA” SHOW HOW LITTLE WAS LEARNED EIGHTY YEARS AFTER HIROSHIMA

From Japan To Palestine, The Dehumanization Of The Victims Of American Imperialist Violence Has Enabled That Type Of Mass Killing To Be Repeated – And Rationalised.

On May 22nd 2025, the register of all victims of the American atomic bombing of Hiroshima was brought out from its stone-chamber cenotaph at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, following a silent prayer at 8.15am – the exact time the bomb fell on August 6th 1945, 80 years ago.

The register lists 344,306 names, with one volume dedicated to those whose identities are unknown. Marking the 80th anniversary, the city allowed media to view the inside of the chamber for the first time.

That very same day, as Hiroshima quietly marked its dead, Republican Congressman Randy Fine went on Fox News to suggest that a nuclear weapon be dropped on Gaza. Despite his history of incendiary and extremist remarks, he was not the first American politician to make such a statement.

A year earlier, on March 21st 2024, Republican Congressman Tim Walberg also suggested dropping a nuclear weapon on Gaza, “like Nagasaki and Hiroshima”.

The previous November, less than a month after Israel began its assault on October 7th 2023, heritage minister Amichay Eliyahu, of the Jewish Power Party, told a Hebrew radio station that a nuclear bomb should be dropped on Gaza.

Some Israeli commentators warned that calls to “nuke Gaza” risked drawing international outrage and undermining Israel’s long-standing policy of nuclear ambiguity – its refusal to confirm or deny possessing such weapons. After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suspended him from cabinet meetings and publicly disavowed the remarks, Eliyahu claimed his words were “metaphorical”.

Since Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza, comparisons to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which took place three days later on August 9th 1945, have been invoked by a range of figures.

The frequency and flippancy with which politicians and pundits have entertained – and at times encouraged – the nuclear destruction of Gaza has struck a nerve in Japan, where anti-war and pro-Palestine sentiment has surged.

The frequency and flippancy with which politicians and pundits have entertained – and at times encouraged – the nuclear destruction of Gaza has struck a nerve in Japan

Last year, Nihon Hidankyo, the group representing living atomic bomb survivors (hibakusha), won the Nobel Peace Prize. One of its leaders, Toshiyuki Mimaki, said aid workers in Gaza deserved the honour instead. Earlier that year, the mayor of Nagasaki refused to invite the Israeli ambassador to the city’s memorial, despite public criticism from Israel’s embassy and its supporters.

Japan’s pro-Palestine mobilisation has not been confined to civil society. In July 2025, Reiwa Shinsengumi, a five-year-old left-wing populist party led by former actor Taro Yamamoto, overtook the century-old Japanese Communist Party in the lower house and gained an additional seat in the upper house. Reiwa’s platform includes an explicit opposition to Zionism and support for Palestinian rights.

After nearly two years of a live-streamed genocide, the Japanese response carries a particular historical resonance.

In a country where the devastation of nuclear war is a living memory, casual calls to obliterate Gaza reflect the same logic of annihilation. That this recognition comes from survivors of mass destruction – who have stood publicly with Palestinians in Gaza – underscores not only the cruelty of such rhetoric, but the ease and impunity with which it is voiced.

Eighty years after Hiroshima, politicians’ open calls for the extermination of an entire civilian population – even as Palestinians are starved, bombed and incinerated – reveal how little has been learned, and how thoroughly such apocalyptic violence has been normalized.

IT IS NOT OKAY TO STILL BELIEVE THE LIES ABOUT GAZA IN AUGUST OF 2025 IF YOU ARE A GROWN ADULT

It’s Not Okay To Be A Grown Adult With Internet Access In August 2025 And Still Believe This Mass Atrocity And Genocide Is About Self-Defense.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe this mass atrocity is about self-defense.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that people in Gaza are not being deliberately starved by Israel.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that Israel destroyed Gaza’s entire healthcare system because there were Hamas bases in every part of that healthcare system.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that Israel is banning foreign journalists from entering Gaza because it is concerned for the journalists’ safety.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that Israel has been killing a record-shattering number of journalists in Gaza because all of those journalists were Hamas.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that Israel has been killing a shocking number of civilians in Gaza because Hamas is using civilians as human shields.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that unproven claims made by Israeli officials about what’s happening in Gaza should be considered plausible until proven false.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that this mass atrocity is about hostages, or is about Hamas, or is about October 7th, or is about anything besides the long-sought agenda to remove Palestinians from a Palestinian territory.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe this is a very complicated issue.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still believe that this all started on October 7th.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still frame an active genocide as a moral gray area with bad actors on both sides.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still say you don’t know enough about Gaza to have an opinion one way or the other.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still support Israel.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still support Donald Trump.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and still support the western power alliance.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and not be outraged at what you are seeing.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and not be doing everything you can to end this nightmare.

It’s not okay to be a grown adult with internet access in August 2025 and not be doing everything you can to make sure that nothing like this can ever happen again.

AMERICA STAGED AN ALL-STAR FOOTBALL GAME IN THE FALLOUT ZONE AFTER BOMBING NAGASAKI

On New Year’s Day, 1946, One Of The Most Surreal And Disturbing Sporting Events In American History Was Held In The Japanese City Of Nagasaki.

Less than five months after an dropping atomic bomb on August 9th that destroyed half the city and killed at least 75,000 people the game was staged by the occupying forces of the American military.

The game received wide coverage in the American media at the time and was dubbed the Atomic Bowl.

Then it became largely forgotten, almost lost to history.

As we approach the 80th anniversary of this attack, this game remains an appropriate metaphor for the Nagasaki bomb, the second nuclear weapon dropped on a large Japanese city by the United States at the end of World War II. This horrific bombing and its aftermath has long been overshadowed by the first atomic blast three days earlier at Hiroshima.

In late September 1945, shortly after the Japanese surrender that ended the war, tens of thousands of American Army troops and Marines landed near Nagasaki in southern Japan. They found the city decimated—the bomb had exploded a mile off target over a suburb where 15,000 Catholics had lived—with countless survivors injured or suffering from radiation disease. Many of the Americans were exposed to lingering (and poorly monitored) levels of radiation in the ruins.

“What were we doing here, happily celebrating an American holiday…on a grotesque golgotha so recently hallowed by horror? The question had no answer.”

Since the end of hostilities, American commanders had looked for ways to normalize the American occupation in the Pacific and Europe. A military orientation film, Our Job in Japan, (written by Theodore Geisel, who later became Dr. Seuss) was shown to arriving members of the occupying forces. It told them their main job was “to be ourselves” and show that “the American way…was a pretty good way to live.” This included mounting baseball and football games in which American soldiers could compete. Military officials believed this was also a way for servicemen, as one put it, to “blow off steam” and impress the locals with the glory of American sports.

In December, a Marine commander ordered that a football game be held in Japan for the Christmas and New Year’s holidays. Why did the military choose Nagaskai of all places as the site for this game, on a field so close to ground zero? No written records documenting the reasons exist. Additionally, later in 1946, American servicemen helped organize—and served as judges for—a Miss Atom Bomb beauty pageant in Nagasaki for local women.

One of the organizers of the Atomic Bowl football contest, Lt. Gerald Sanders later noted that the game was a kind of tribute to fallen colleagues. “We thought it would be totally appropriate,” he said. “It was certainly not to look like there was a joyful glee in what had happened there… We were there, yet we had many buddies that didn’t make it through the war.”

A gridiron was cleared in front of a middle school which had lost 162 students and 13 teachers to the atomic bomb. Angelo Bertelli, who had won the Heisman Trophy in 1943 as quarterback for Notre Dame, and “Bullet Bill” Osmanski, the Chicago Bears’ star running back, were selected as captains. A top officer wrote a press release promising that the game would have “all the color—and more” of the bowl games to be played that day back in the States. On hand would be a Marine band and Japanese girl cheerleaders.

But they would have to play touch, not tackle, football because shards from the atomic blast still littered the field.

On an unusually chilly day in Nagasaki, about 1,500 servicemen gathered to watch the spectacle. “Here and there were isolated Japanese—a father and his boy, a group of giggly girls, two old men—all looking small and lost and bewildered by it all,” one observer, a Naval officer, wrote in a letter to his wife.

The result was hardly important—Osmanski scored a late touchdown and kicked the extra point for the 14-13 win—but for two days the game was covered widely in America. Then no one wrote about it. At all. No photos and no footage emerged. This lack of subsequent attention reflected Nagasaki’s second-class atomic status. In coming decades, American journalists and notables frequently visited Hiroshima, but they rarely trekked to Nagasaki, which the locals referred to as “the inferior A-bomb city.”

Even the players in the briefly celebrated game were reluctant to discuss it. Growing up, Robert Bertelli never once heard his father talk about playing in an all-star football match in Japan in 1946. Angelo would die in 1999 at the age of 78, and his son—by then known as Bob Bert, a drummer who was a member of the influential rock group Sonic Youth—never heard him mention the game. The former quarterback never spoke about it in interviews. Neither did Osmanski.

The offspring of other players in this game had not been told anything about it by their fathers. This sports stunt disappeared from journalism and history for decades.

Finally, in 1984, one of the Atomic Bowl’s attendees, William Watt, a Navy officer, poet, and literature professor, wrote a short piece for the New York Times’ sports section describing the game and his reaction at the time: “What were we doing here, happily celebrating an American holiday…on a grotesque golgotha so recently hallowed by horror? The question had no answer.”

While a large segment of the American public continues to support the use of the first atomic bomb at Hiroshima, historians have debated that decision. Some have especially questioned the second bombing. For example, Martin Sherwin, a Pulitzer Prize winner for co-authoring, with Kai Bird, the biography of J. Robert Oppenheimer, American Prometheus, called the Nagasaki attack “gratuitous at best…and genocidal at worst.”

The disappearance of the Atomic Bowl and the relegation of Nagasaki to an afterthought of Hiroshima raises the question of whether there are lessons from the second atomic attack that extend beyond those prompted by the Hiroshima bombing.

Nearly all of the victims of the Nagasaki bombing were non-combatants, mainly women and children and the elderly, as well as many foreign workers who had been seized and sent to Japan to work in arms factories. Hiroshima did host a major military base—a fact long used to justify the tremendous loss of civilian life there. The bombing of Nagasaki, which was added as a target at nearly the last-minute, showed that civilian casualties could be completely ignored. So much so that a football game could even be played by Americans on one of the killing fields.

The Nagasaki bombing is a reminder, perhaps more so than Hiroshima, that a military attack on a large city, killing tens of thousands of civilians, can become morally accepted not just by civilian and military leaders, but by the public. Some polls in the past have showed that many if not most Americans would today support an American nuclear strike that might kill massive numbers of civilians in, for instance, North Korea.

As we currently witness massive civilian casualties in wars from Africa to Ukarine to Gaza—more kids dead than soldiers in some cases—there’s good reason for the second atomic bombing to receive as much attention as the first.

THE CASE AGAINST THE ATOMIC BOMB FROM GEORGE ORWELL

In October 1945, George Orwell Wrote An Article Titled “You And The Atom Bomb” For The Socialist Publication Tribune.

Orwell’s piece makes a compelling argument against the atomic bomb, noting the myriad ways in which it maximizes state power and enables a handful of empires:

“From various symptoms one can infer that the Russians do not yet possess the secret of making the atomic bomb; on the other hand, the consensus of opinion seems to be that they will possess it within a few years. So we have before us the prospect of two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by which millions of people can be wiped out in a few seconds, dividing the world between them. It has been rather hastily assumed that this means bigger and bloodier wars, and perhaps an actual end to the machine civilisation. But suppose—and really this the likeliest development—that the surviving great nations make a tacit agreement never to use the atomic bomb against one another? Suppose they only use it, or the threat of it, against people who are unable to retaliate? In that case we are back where we were before, the only difference being that power is concentrated in still fewer hands and that the outlook for subject peoples and oppressed classes is still more hopeless.”

In spite of his commitment to democratic socialism, Orwell’s contentions here are decidedly libertarian. At the core of his polemic is the premise that nuclear weapons grease the wheels of statism by allowing the world’s superpowers to hold the global population hostage. Orwell dispels the most optimistic argument put forward by proponents of the atomic bomb, namely that such technology would inaugurate a new era of peace. That peace, however, would be maintained by the threat of mutual assured destruction. The ruling class would be permitted to amass even more power, all while waving the banner of “peace through strength” and stockpiling tens of thousands of nuclear warheads. The threat of nuclear war would facilitate the exponential growth of the state. Rather than reaping a peace dividend, it would use the prospect of nuclear annihilation to expand its empire, thereby exerting its awesome tyranny over both its own citizenry and billions of foreign civilians.

It should come as no surprise that the advent of the atomic bomb kicked off a period of heightened American military intervention abroad. The Cold War undoubtedly fueled that trend, but at the heart of the Cold War was an arms race that nuclear technology accelerated. For over forty years, the world’s two greatest superpowers sought to expand their influence over weaker states. Rather than discourage military aggression, the availability of atomic weapons encouraged the United States to embark on costlier, deadlier foreign adventures. The prospect of mutual assured destruction meant that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union had any incentive to back down or avoid conflict. Both powers, bolstered by their respective nuclear arsenals, felt inclined to pursue militaristic agendas with relative impunity.

When the Cold War ended, the specter of nuclear annihilation receded, at least temporarily. But the September 11th “terrorist” attacks allowed the George W. Bush administration to tap into the American public’s fears of a nuclear holocaust. The unipolar moment posed no hindrance to the neoconservative lobby. It convinced the American public that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon. 73% of Americans supported the initial invasion of Iraq precisely because they believed that the United States risked eventual nuclear attack if it didn’t launch a preventive war. In the two decades since, American military interventionism has only grown more brazen. Much in the same way that the Iron Dome incentivizes Israel to pursue a belligerent foreign policy, America’s vast nuclear arsenal allows the American regime to sidestep any concerns that its actions abroad will engender blowback.

At the end of his article, Orwell writes:

“Had the atomic bomb turned out to be something as cheap and easily manufactured as a bicycle or an alarm clock, it might well have plunged us back into barbarism, but it might, on the other hand, have meant the end of national sovereignty and of the highly-centralised police State. If, as seems to be the case, it is a rare and costly object as difficult to produce as a battleship, it is likelier to put an end to large-scale wars at the cost of prolonging indefinitely a ‘peace that is no peace.’”

Orwell correctly deduces the paradox at the heart of the Cold War. In actuality, it was a series of hot wars marked by a lack of direct hostilities between the United States and the Soviet Union. And like all hot wars, it necessitated the erosion of individual liberties and the deployment of propaganda to expand the national security state and its military apparatus. The costliness of the atomic bomb—the American government spent the modern equivalent of $30 billion on the Manhattan Project—meant a compounding of state power, one that would further exacerbate the asymmetry between government authority and individual liberty. After all, an atomic bomb is too expensive a weapon to be attained by anybody without access to a wealthy government’s revenue stream. As a result, it proved incapable of erasing the “distinction between great states and small states.” Nor did it crystallize a future in which the “power of the State over the individual would have been greatly weakened.” On the contrary, it strengthened the health of the state.

Technology is often the handmaiden of authoritarianism. Whether it takes the form of the atomic bomb, mass surveillance, social media, or artificial intelligence, technology has a habit of accelerating statist trends, rendering the citizen more and more powerless. The more complicated a technology becomes, the more difficult it becomes for the individual to reproduce it, and the more burdensome it becomes for non-elites to harness its potential in service of non-statist aims. Orwell’s warning of “two or three monstrous super-states” holding the world captive with their nuclear weapons has proven prophetic. As Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton argues, the only recourse is abolition.

JULIAN ASSANGE JOINED SYDNEY GAZA HUMANITARIAN PROTEST AS THOUSANDS CROSS BRIDGE

Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Was Among The Tens Of Thousands Of Protesters In Australia Staging A “Humanitarians For Gaza” March Across The Sydney Harbour Bridge.

The transparency media campaigner and activist, who moved back to his native Australia last year, after reaching a plea deal with the American government to avoid possible life imprisonment for publishing classified anti-war government information, was not expected to speak at the protest.

The bridge was closed for Australia’s biggest pro-Palestine march.

Protesters marched across the bridge this afternoon after the Supreme Court of New South Wales refused an application by police to ban the demonstration.

Police had raised concerns about public safety and the potential for a “crowd crush”, but Justice Belinda Rigg sided with the organizers, finding that they had convincingly explained the reasons why they believed the Israeli genocide in Gaza demanded an urgent response.

Palestine Action Group Sydney, the organizer of the march, said before the protest that it expected 50,000 people to attend. However, heavy rain was a dampener but thousands still marched onto the bridge with estimates being put at between 25,000 and 100,000.

The activist group said it wanted to highlight what the United Nations has described as worsening famine conditions in Gaza.

News media reported that the Israeli military had killed at least 62 people in Gaza yesterday, including 38 people desperately seeking food aid.

A 17-year-old Palestinian was reported to have died of starvation, one of at least seven Palestinians who died of malnutrition within the past 24 hours across Gaza, report medical sources.

The death toll from Israel’s 22-month war on the besieged enclave has reached at least 61,709, including including 17,492 children.

TED CRUZE CHRISTIANS BETRAYED THE INNOCENTS

True Followers Of Christ Cannot Support The Killing And Starvation Of Gaza’s Children. Trump Could, By Stopping Military Assistance To Israel And Demanding An End To The War, Halt This Tragedy Immediately.

The whole world is witnessing the horror of the intentional starvation and killing of innocent children and women in Palestine. These grisly policies are supported by many Zionist Christians such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who claims he is biblically directed to support Israel.

On Sunday, another steadfast Israel supporter, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R- SC), outlined one of its options: “I think Israel’s come to conclude that they can’t achieve a goal of ending the war with Hamas that would be satisfactory to the safety of Israel and that they’re going to do in Gaza what we did in Tokyo and Berlin.” (Will this include firebombing?)

On Tuesday, self-professed Christian Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) posted the following on X: “Israel has no responsibility to provide any kind of aid into Gaza. They are repeatedly held to a different standard than the rest of the world.” That’s been Cotton’s consistent view throughout the Gaza war. Back in April 2024 he declared that “Israel has no responsibility to provide aid to Gaza.” Note: Western countries and the United Nations seek to provide aid to Gazans, but it must pass through Israeli checkpoints.

House speaker and vocal evangelical Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) has also been a reliable supporter of the Israeli government throughout its assault on Gaza. “These calls for a ceasefire are outrageous,” he declared in November 2023. He must have missed a few Bible studies working so hard to maintain the Israel First agenda.

The American Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on Tuesday compared France’s recognizing the state of Palestine as “letting the Nazis have a victory after World War 2.”

Conservative columnist Kurt Schlichter, who identifies as a Christian, wants to “mercilessly annihilate Hamas and its allies.”

Another conservative, Will Chamberlain, vice president of external affairs for The Edmund Burke Foundation, which claims to promote Christian values, on Monday said, “There is no more ridiculous spectacle than ‘right-wing’ accounts whining about the plight of the Palestinians.”

Perhaps Chamberlain’s foundation should consider sending him back to Sunday school. In fact, from the looks of it, all of these Ted Cruz Christians would be well advised to turn to their Bibles. As Matthew 6:24 says, “You cannot serve two masters.” That may be especially the case when the other master is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose war policies are in contradiction to the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.

Jesus declared, “Let the children come to me” (Matthew 19:14), yet these Christians turn a blind eye as Gazans, including the youngest among them, face starvation. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God” (Matthew 5:9) stands in stark contrast to their war fervor. And in Micah 6:8, we are urged to “act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God”—a call these leaders ignore as they submissively demonstrate loyalty to foreign powers over the lessons of Jesus Christ (and over the interests of the nation they ostensibly represent).

Many Christian Zionists enable and support a policy that would make Marie Antoinette blush, offering no cake but only starvation and death.

Scripture says Jesus is the bread of life. When we partake of Him, we shall not hunger for worldly ambition and political power. Instead, we love the least of these as he did. Jesus says his power is made perfect in weakness. Christ is found amongst the Gazans stripped of their homes, their possessions, their lives, and now even their food.

Jesus, the fulfillment of the covenant—not Netanyahu—must guide our path. President Donald Trump, by stopping military assistance to Israel and demanding an end to the Gaza war, could halt this tragedy immediately. Until then, the indelible black mark on our nation grows darker, a testament to a faith betrayed.

DID YOU KNOW ISRAEL IS STARVING GAZA?

According To The Gaza Health Ministry, 111 People Have Died From Malnutrition Since The War Began, Most Of Them Children. Alarmingly, 43 Of Those Deaths Occurred Just In The Past Week.

The United Nations reports that the share of children suffering from severe malnutrition has jumped from 2.4 percent in February to 8.8 percent in the first two weeks of July. These figures have been backed by more and more reports by foreign and Palestinian doctors, journalists and international organizations of children and adults dying of hunger.

Spokespeople for the Israel Defense Forces and the government are trying to blur the reality, but even Israel’s official numbers confirm the hunger in Gaza. The IDF claimed this week that 71 trucks carrying food have entered Gaza every day over the past month.

That means each of those trucks is supposed to deliver enough food to feed 30,000 people a day. You don’t need to be familiar with the logistics of food delivery or the laws of war to know that this is tantamount to starvation.

The famine also emerges from figures provided by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which was supposed to solve the food shortage in the Strip. The GHF says that it has distributed 85 million meals since it began operations two months ago.

However, a simple calculation shows that during that period, Gazans would have needed 353 million meals to stave off hunger. And that does not even take into account the problems of food distribution and access for the most needy, as well as the impossibility of extracting the nutritional value of the meals in the absence of cooking gas and under the conditions of displacement.

The famine that has been created is another facet of Israel’s cruel inhumanity towards the people of Gaza. It constitutes a war crime and a crime against humanity and is a clear violation of the orders issued a year and a half ago by the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

The famine does not contribute anything to the war effort against Hamas. Its gunmen will be the last to suffer hunger in Gaza. Before that, it will be children, women and Israeli hostages still captive there who starve.

DESPITE AN OFFICIAL BAN, CANADA IS STILL ARMING ISRAEL A REPORT FINDS

In The Course Of A Week, Canada Accused Israel Of Violating International Law, Announced Ottawa Will Recognize A Palestinian State, And Sent Aid To Be Airlifted To Gaza.

But a shocking new report makes clear that Trump’s proposed 51st state still arms Israel’s death machine.

Canada sent at least 391 shipments containing bullets, military equipment, weapons parts, aircraft components, and communication devices to Israel since late 2023, despite Ottawa’s repeated claims to have ended weapons deliveries to the apartheid state, a new report has revealed.

By sifting through data from the Israel Tax Authority, researchers at Arms Embargo Now discovered what they called “a continuous, massive pipeline of Canadian weapons flowing directly to Israel” comprising over 400,000 bullets, multiple shipments of cartridges, and a variety of parts for Israel’s fleet of F-35 fighter jets. Since mid-2024, Israel received four shipments of Doppler Velocity Sensors, which provide navigation data needed for the F-35’s target acquisition and weapons delivery systems, five shipments of lightweight composite panels used by the planes, and two shipments of Modular Product Testers, which are used to diagnose problems on Israel’s air force fleet.

Of the 391 deliveries identified, the report’s authors were able to track direct 47 shipments of military gear with detailed commercial shipping records sent by Canadian companies to Israeli companies. 38 of those shipments were sent to Israel’s biggest military firm, Elbit Systems, and its various subsidiaries.

In March 2024, the previous Canadian administration claimed to have halted all permits for arms shipments to Tel Aviv, after the legislature passed a non-binding motion declaring that “Israel must respect international humanitarian law” and that “the price of defeating Hamas cannot be the continuous suffering of all Palestinian civilians.” In the following months, then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau insisted Canada no longer facilitated Israel’s horrors, going as far as publicly chiding one concerned Palestinian, “we’ve stopped exports of arms to Israel.”

But just before the apparent shift in policy, Ottawa greenlit a massive number of permits for Israeli-bound weapons deliveries, front-loading hundreds of orders in an apparent attempt to preemptively circumvent their own ban. Of the $30.6 million in military equipment sent to Israel in 2023 – the highest yearly total on record – $28.5 million was approved between October and December. Even today, many of those shipments continue to be fulfilled. To date, just 30 permits for military deliveries have been cancelled by Canada, which made that decision following a similar move by the UK in mid-2024 after the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel was violating international law.

“The Canadian government appears to have pursued a strategy of rushing through a record-breaking number of arms export permit approvals to Israel prior to publicly committing to pause approving any new ones,” Arm Embargo Now explained in their report. “This was then quietly undermined by a series of exceptions and loopholes,” researchers wrote, suggesting “the government’s policy shifts were… aimed at diffusing public criticism while maintaining material support.”

Other Canadian institutions to have assisted Israel’s genocidal siege include a number of its universities. A separate report published by Just Peace Advocates found that in 2023 up to $100 million went completely untaxed as it was funneled to Israeli universities from their ‘charitable’ arms in Canada. The money went to a variety of schools with strong ties to occupation forces, including Israel’s self-described “academic home of soldiers,” Bar-Ilan University, which took in around $4 million that year.

In addition, nearly $17 million was sent tax-free to Ben-Gurion University in 2023, which bragged of having “transformed itself into a back office for war” in October that year. Months later, Ben-Gurion announced the creation of two new “elite academic programs for future [Israeli military] recruits, as part of preparations for the transfer of IDF technological units to southern Israel.” The university says it works “in tandem” with the Israeli Air Force Flight School and claims to have trained around 1,000 pilots for military service.

Also receiving untaxed funds was Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science, which has been described as “the incubator of most nuclear weapons work in Israel.” Weizmann has well-documented ties to a variety of Israeli spies implicated in efforts to steal nuclear secrets, and drew international attention after it was partially destroyed in a retaliatory Iranian airstrike on June 15th.

According to Just Peace Advocates, Canadian sources delivered over $36 million to the Weizmann Institute in 2023.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started