Journal of the Association of Future Philosophers

How to Reduce the Danger of Terrorism
by  "Socrates" 4-10-1998

    Nagasaki and Hiroshima are the only cases where nuclear terrorists successfully achieved their goals by nuking babies. As the only examples of the use of nuclear bombs on innocent people, they are important for the study  of the terrorism danger we face.
    In addition to the use of nuclear weapons, the dangers of large scale terrorism we face also include the use of biological, chemical and other weapons of genocide against babies and other innocent people.
    With the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology, the danger of another Truman nuking yet more cities, murdering yet more innocent babies, increases. The development of biological and chemical weapons by terrorists poses a serious threat against humanity.
    While some still deny that nuking babies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki is terrorism, terrorism is the use of force or the threat of force against innocent persons to affect government policy. Hence, nuking babies in Nagasaki and Hiroshima is obviously terrorism since innocent babies were attacked, and the bombers' objective was to change Japanese government policy.
    Nagasaki and Hiroshima illustrate how government makes us vulnerable especially to large-scale terrorism. While the partisans of government might claim government provides security, the available evidence shows that it makes us especially vulnerable to large scale terrorism, including biological, chemical and nuclear terrorism in a number of ways.
1. Government creates terrorist weapons.
    Nuclear weapons are government's creation, with government funding scientists to create uranium and plutonium bombs, and of building increasingly smaller and more destructive "Fat Men and Little Boys."
    Since it uncorked its nuclear genie over Hiroshima, revealing the face of government, government spread its technology, spread nuclear materiel, and created incentives for spreading the threat that faces us.
    With the available empirical evidence provided by the ominous historical record, we can rationally expect that government will develop new terrorist weapons next century.
2. Terrorism is part of government's modus operandi.
    Government has used its terrorist weapons, including the Iraqi government's use of chemical weapons against innocent people, while the U.S. government nuking babies being the most infamous.
    While many do not realize that the U.N. embargo of Iraq is an example of terrorism, it clearly fits the definition. It has murdered approximately one million innocent persons, including 700,000 children, and the U.N. officials imposed it in order to affect Iraqi government policy.
    Based on the number of people murdered, their crime against humanity is more deadly act of terrorism than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
    While the partisans of government might fantasize about changing its nature, changing it into a humanitarian institution, we realize that the available empirical evidence indicates the seriousness of the terrorism danger we face.
3. Being ruled by government makes us vulnerable to terrorism.
    In the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, babies were targeted to affect the Japanese government. The government's existence was a necessary condition for the terrorist bombing.
    The morally repugnant attack against innocent babies was perpetrated to shock the Japanese rulers into surrender. The terrorists murdered innocent sheep to get at the wolves.
    Some partisans of government attempt to exonerate the U.S. government for its terrorist crimes, blaming the Japanese government for Pearl Harbor, but that can't create an ethical right to murder babies.
    But, their argument shows these innocent babies were targeted for murder because they were living under government. This explains their murder, but in no way whatsoever does it justify it, nor does it contradict the fact that the U.S. government is a terrorist organization.
    This explains why successful terrorist attacks are such heinous crimes. To affect governments, the terrorists create massive numbers of casualties, and the more impervious the government, the more horrendous the terrorist attack.
    Hence, when we contemplate the enormous number of innocent victims for terrorists to successfully affect U.S. government policy, we understand the danger we face.
    Since in the case of the U.S. government, conventional bombs are likely to be ineffective, but chemical, biological or nuclear bombs are likely to be effective, we are especially vulnerable from these weapons.
The the partisans' fantasy that government protects society keeps us in danger of large-scale terrorism.
    The partisan of government might believe it protects us from such weapons by preventing terrorists from smuggling nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. However, the evidence of government losing its drug war should make rational people question these claims.
    Despite its Draconian laws, its huge drug-war budget, its imprisonment of many using its drug laws, drug businesspersons, financiers, entrepreneurs, shippers, advertisers, wholesalers, and retailers bring huge amounts of drugs -- from Colombia, California, Afghanistan and all over the world to consumers such as Bill Clinton.  This shows the notion government could prevent the shipping of chemical or biological canisters or nuclear bombs the size of suitcases into American cities is a dangerous fantasy of the partisans.
    Understanding the three-pronged problem of terrorism government poses to humanity suggests the solution necessary to reduce the danger to humanity.
    Are we going to join the partisan of government and passively wait for additional large scale terrorism to harm yet more babies, or, based on the ample available evidence, will we take pro-active steps to solve the problem of government?

Copyright © 1998, The Association of Future Philosophers