US nuked Japan to demonstrate world must obey it: Journalist
The United States launched nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 to demonstrate to the world, particularly to the Soviet Union, that they must obey the Empire’s demands in the future, an American activist and journalist says.
Mike Billington, the Asia editor for the Executive Intelligence Review, made the remarks in a phone interview with Press TV on Tuesday when asked what message the United States wanted to convey to the world when it nuked the two Japanese cities in the final days of WWII.
This week marks 71 years since the US carried out nuclear strikes against Hiroshima and Nagasaki which killed more than 200,000 people.
In May, US President Barack Obama visited Japan but failed to apologize over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
“There was, as it is very well-known, absolutely no need of the nuclear bombing of Japan. They had already sued for peace through the Vatican,” Billington said.
“It was done entirely as a demonstration to the world that the United States was crazy enough to mass incinerate tens of thousands of people, and as a warning to the Soviet Union in particular that, in fact, they must submit to . . . a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Russia if they did not essentially submit to a one world government based on the British and the United States,” he added.
“That demonstration of lunacy by launching those two nuclear attacks did not stop an invasion. The invasion would never have happened; they were suing for peace. We had MacArthur, the brilliant General [Douglas] MacArthur, [who] had correctly and competently cut off the supply of raw material to the Japanese homeland and they could not have sustained a war any longer,” the activist stated.
“So, the lesson for today is very, very clear which is that Obama is openly threatening to use nuclear weapons. He’s dedicated a trillion dollars to upgrading B-6112 nuclear weapons, and in the words of his military people, the purpose of those upgrading is to make those weapons more usable. That’s their term,” he noted.
“In other words, the old idea of mutual assured destruction (MAD) that the nuclear weapons capable of blowing each other up would prevent either the Russian side or the US side from using nuclear weapons, that’s being discarded in favor of a [policy of] usable nuclear weapon[s],” the analyst observed.
“And of course in the context of the US mass mobilization of forces on Russia’s border, both in Europe and Asia as part of the encirclement of China, and a massing of forces not seen since the time Hitler mobilized his forces on the border of the USSR preparing for the Operation Barbarossa,” he said.
“So we are in an extremely dangerous situation and in which the lesson that should have learned by insanity of the genocidal dropping the nuclear weapons back in 1945 has not been learnt,” he pointed out.
In his concluding remarks, Belington opined that President Franklin “Roosevelt would never have used those nuclear weapons, it’s [happened] only that because he died, sadly too early, and that Harry Truman, a weak puppet of Wall Street and London, was used at British instigation drop those nuclear weapons as a signal to Russia and to the Third World that they had better obeyed the Empire’s demands in the future.”