PDA

View Full Version : Einstein's Letter Bears Repeating for the 21st Century


PittsburghAfterDark
04-12-2006, 01:14 AM
This week the History Channel is running the “10 Days That Changed America” and one of the 10 bears a striking resemblance to current events.??The day??? Not really fixed since the “event” was Einstein’s letter to FDR that led to the creation of America’s atomic bomb program.??The letter was written by Leo Szilard August 2, 1939, obviously one of the most brilliant physicists in the world, signed by Einstein and delivered to FDR by Alexander Sachs, one of Roosevelt’s economic speech writers on October 11, 1939.

Notice the timeline, nearly two months passed since a message from Einstein got to FDR.??During the interim Nazi Germany invaded Poland in September 1939.??Germany had already annexed Austria, the Sudetland and later on the rest of Czechoslovakia.??These events leading to World War II were already off the headline page.??Kristalnacht had already happened and the anti-Jewish pogrom in Germany had been in place for years; from which Einstein himself was a refugee.??As German headlines of the day read when he fled to America “We’re finally rid of that damn dirty Jew.”

Despite all of this Einstein remained a pacifist at heart but realized that Nazi Germany armed with an atomic weapon, as theorized by Leo Szilard and Enrico Fermi, would be a threat to all of civilization.??If such a weapon were to exist, the Americans must possess it.??Furthermore the world’s known stores of uranium came from two sources, Czechoslovakia and the Belgian Congo.??The Nazi’s realizing this took control of the uranium mine and dictated a moratorium on worldwide sales; they would monopolize the element needed to enact any nuclear program.

The thing that Einstein most feared was kind of ironic.??Now August 2, 1939 was before the death camps in Poland had been constructed, before the Wansee Conference which led to the chilling Nazi term “The Final Solution to the Jewish Question” and before the modern redefinition of total war was exercised by the Nazis and Soviets across the USSR.??The thing that Einstein most feared were the words Adolph Hitler had laid forth in Mein Kampf and the early realities of the vision laid out in his political manifesto.

It was words of Hitler that moved the most brilliant man of the 20th Century into breaking his stance of neutral pacifism.??True, he did not advocate the use of atomic arms.??He did recognize the evil of a state ruled by a maniacal dictator following a national policy of national and racial superiority and political imagery and ceremony that had taken the place of organized religion.??These things led to pointing out the obvious, America had best act in defense of the world and itself.??There was a threat to the world unlike anything mankind had seen.

Today Iran announced that it has finished purification of its first batch of uranium.??The same element Einstein feared in the hands of Nazis.??The same element used in fissile base atomic arms since the Trinity Test.??The same element used on Hiroshima that led to over 100,000 deaths from an atomic blast and its after-effects.??Note: Nagasaki was a plutonium-based weapon.

So where is the modern day Einstein, Szilard and Fermi???Who on the scientific side, political or economic side of world events will step up and be the new standard bearer of prophesizing the evil in the world’s midsts???Where is the former Nobel Prize Winner to warn the world of the evils of an Iranian nuclear capability???Is the world so intellectually dishonest and politically divided that the parallels between Hitler and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cannot be made?

“The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world.”, “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,”, “relations with the United States are not a cure for our ills.”, are just one of Ahmadinejad’s quotes.??The world knows all too well how Islamic revolution has made itself felt in the West and in Israel.??We know the history of the African Embassy bombings, the U.S. hostages taken in Tehran that birthed this modern revolution, the attacks of Bali, Madrid, London and September 11th.??All of these were done in the name of Islamic revolution of one type or another.??

We know of Iran’s desire to throw Israel into the sea.??We see the headlines and read the rhetoric that the Holocaust was a myth, that Europe should birth a Jewish state if they wish to see it exist, we know of the United States’ being the Great Satan in official Iranian government dogma, “Death to America” is pass? and no longer shocking to us.

So how is it we’re so blind???How is it any mention of eliminating such a capability of a self-described sworn enemy is met with political catcalls, cries for talks and further negotiation???Nothing from any state, group or individual acting in the name of “Islamic revolution” has ever indicated this is a belief that can be moderated or negotiated with.??

There is nothing in the history of “Islamic revolution” that shows that peaceful co-existence is possible on their half of the equation. We have decades of experience of ancillary and direct evidence to support this belief.??We have countless public statements of intention and ill will from the leadership of Iran since 1979, far more than were written or spoken by Hitler in the 1930’s.??Couple that with the educational system of Madrasses across the Arabic and Persian world and you have a built in fanatical youth base surpassing the obedience, absolution and desire to serve that surpassed the Hitler Youth and quite probably the most ardent SS true believers.

So, with history as our guide where is our unquestionable genius to point out how evil in 2006 is no different than evil in 1939???Is it that hard for people to learn from the most blatant period of barbarity in the history of the world and not to learn from the mistakes made by Chamberlain, FDR and Marshal P?tain trying to appease a dictator hell bent on power he believes stems from racial purity???Instead we’re faced with a similar dictator voicing a similar belief system where organized religion is being perverted to political and ideological ends.

It’s time for some uniting voice to stand up, speak to the leaders of the West and tell them that evil in our time must be met, faced down and defeated as was done by the greatest minds of the 20th Century nearly 70 years ago.?? It’s time to recognize that atomic arms would be no more secure or desirable in the hands of a religiously driven government of absolutism than it would have been in a national socialist government of absolutism.

Iranian nuclear capability must be destroyed at any cost and without any further negotiation.

Labrocca
04-12-2006, 01:30 AM
That was an excellent read PAD. I will read it again tomorrow. Your comparisons are on the money. I have pretty much been saying all year that this is going to be WWIII very soon. It just seems to be building up. It might take 3-5 more years to come to a head but so did WWII.

AlonzoMourning23
04-14-2006, 01:16 AM
Just to point out, einstein denounced nuclear weapons when he realized the power they would have. He never approved of the bombing of hiroshima and insisted that roosevelt never would have dropped the bomb if he had been alive. He later referred to that letter as the one great mistake in his life. He also has a particularly interesting quote in relation to nuclear weapons in 1944:

when the war is over, then there will be in all countries a pursuit of secret war preparations with technological means which will lead inevitably to preventative wars and to destruction even more terrible than the present destruction of life.

Though the iranian president is a populist leader who has no idea how to behave on the international stage. Even Iranians seem embarrassed by his comments. He's a bigot, but he doesn't have the same genocidal rhetoric of germany, doesn't have the personality cult, and he simply doesn't have the desire. Viewing him as a sort of hitler figure is going way overboard. He's also not demanding land, and Iran simply don't have the military capability to invade. If they do actually intend to have nuclear weapons as a deterrent, it's hard to argue that they don't have a legitimate reason to fear attack. Iranian nuclear capability is a threat in my mind not from Iran itself, as I don't think they'd be use for anything but to stop them from being destroyed, but if they were to collapse. It simply increases the risk of weapons falling into the wrong hands (though we did cut funding to secure old soviet nukes). But I think if we had been more even handed and tried to stop nuclear weapons in all of the middle east, and not just in muslim countries, we may not be facing a nuclear Iran. Balance of power tends to reduce conflict, as both fear the others response.

Also, wanting Israel destroyed is nothing new, hell I wish Israel would disapear. It's a ridiculous statement for a president to make, but nothing unheard of.

Though, historically, I don't think the middle east or the west has any better history of peaceful coexistence in relation to the other. In modern times, the west is more intrusive since they're much stronger.

bmulligan
04-16-2006, 12:03 AM
So how is it we?re so blind???How is it any mention of eliminating such a capability of a self-described sworn enemy is met with political catcalls, cries for talks and further negotiation???

We aren't blind but neither are the peace negotiators (aka, liberals and democrats).?? The rank and file truly believe in peace at all costs will solve all the world's ills but their leaders really want "death to america" to happen as soon as possible.??Any country dedicated to personal achievement and private property is an affront to government power, i.e., their power.??

An interesting read, PAD. I havent seen this series, but I am very suprised that this "einstein letter" would be chosen for importance instead of the dropping of Fat Man and Little Boy. Both of which would be more conguent to todays abhorrence of all things nuclear, and directly linked to liberal logic that becuase we are the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in war, it makes us the most dangerous and violent?country ever to exist.

Mayberry
07-08-2006, 05:36 PM
we are the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in war, it makes us the most dangerous and violent country ever to exist.

I would defend that decision until the day I die. Had we not used the bombs, the death toll would have been in the millions. Invading mainland Japan would have been the only way to stop them and everyone knew it. I believe Fat Man and Little Boy were the most humane thing we could do. Now as far as being blind to Iran, it's all boiled down to the sissyfied attitudes of the liberals of this world that think these maniacs will respond to talks and sanctions. They truly are blind if they believe these radical muslims will respond to anything other than direct action. That's the way it's always been and always will be with them. It's damned unfortunate.

AlonzoMourning23
07-08-2006, 09:22 PM
Mayberry, has such violence worked in Lebanon, Palestine, Chechnya or Afghanistan (Soviet invasion)? Attacks by Russia and Israel did nothing but increase extremism. We can kick them out of a country (as we did in Afghanistan) but force doesn't end the problem. In Afghanistan they didn't have public support, but they were much more extreme. But they did have public support going in, because of their struggly against the soviets. Iran has support due to the unfair nature of international politics. Other examples gain both secular and religious support, which allows extremists to gain more recruits. Force may be a necessary short term tactic, or used as a secondary option, but it only strengthens and hardens extremists in the long run. You need to cut off their support before force can be effective. We haven't, and if you don't do that then you only increase their support.