Can we survive the next ten centuries from Self destruction from Nuclear Wars ?

I place all the cards on the table … all the information in the field on what happened in the past …  all the important events of the twentieth century – whether positive or negative for peace –   which had some bearing on the current situation where we have about one hundred thousand Nuclear Warheads located at several locations on the planet Earth and not all of them are in possession of `Safe Hands`.


It all began with Einstein`s special relativity theory and the understanding of the equivalence of mass and energy and of course the equation e = mc^2.

The ball was set rolling for Experimental Research on the subject.


A  certain walk in the snow covered woods outside Stockholm, was to shape the future of the human race, It was a walk during which the walkers viz the Scientists Lise Meitner and her nephew Otto Frisch discussed the findings of an experimental research carried out by another Scientist called Otto Hahn, and during discussions they discerned something of extreme significance relating to the splitting of the Uranium nucleus and consequent release of energy.

In the words of Otto Frisch (recalled in his memoirs) :

“ When I came out of my hotel room after my first night in Kungalve, I found Lise Meitner studying a letter from Hahn and obviously very puzzled by it. I wanted to discuss with her a new experiment that I was planning, but she wouldn’t listen, I had to read that letter. Its content was so startling that I was at first inclined to be sceptical. Hahn and Stresemann had found that those three substances were not radium … (but) barium.

The suggestion that they might after all have made a mistake was waved aside by Lise Meitner: Hahn was too good a chemist for that, she assured me……..

` We walked up and down in the snow, I on skis and she on foot (she said and proved that she could get along just as fast that way), and gradually the idea took shape that this was no chipping or cracking of the nucleus but rather a process to be explained by Bohr`s idea that the nucleus is like a liquid drop; such a drop might elongate and divide itself… We knew that there were strong forces that would resist such a process, just as the surface tension of an ordinary liquid drop resists its division into two smaller ones. But nuclei differed from ordinary drops in one important way: they were electrically charged, and this was known to diminish the effect of the surface tension..

At this point we both sat down on a tree trunk, and started to calculate on scraps of paper. The charge of uranium nucleus, we found was indeed large enough to destroy the effect of surface tension almost completely, so the uranium nucleus might be a very wobbly, unstoppable drop, ready to divide itself at the slightest provocation (such as the impact of a neutron). But there was another problem. When the two drops separated, they would be driven apart by their mutual electric repulsion and would acquire a very large energy, about 200 MeV in all; where could that energy come from? Fortunately Lise Meitner remembered how to compute the masses of nuclei from the so-called packing fraction formula, and in that way she worked out that the two nuclei formed by the division of a uranium nucleus would be higher than the original uranium nucleus by about one-fifth of the mass of a proton. Now whenever mass disappears energy is created, according to Einstein’s formula E =m*c*c, and one fifth of a proton mass was just equivalent to 200 MeV.So here was the source for that energy; it all fitted.` “

The work of a genius …. A masterstroke …. Ushering in unlimited prospects towards achievement of energy security for the world, all in very good taste, But of course, perhaps a step closer towards the `Collapse of civilization`.

(For further reading:  “ Lise Meitner – A life in Physics“ …    …   … By Ruth Lewin Sime)


The properties of Uranium,  the nuclear chain reaction, and the finding that such a chain reaction could either be controlled to produce usable energy or allowed to go out of control to produce a violent explosion, led the Scientists world wide to undertake experiments on the subject.

Two letters written by Einstein to President Roosevelt in August 1939 and March 1940 – the latter actually written to Dr. Sachs for onward transmission to Roosevelt –warning of the German research in fission and urging the President to initiate and then speed up a research programme in the US to explore the feasibility of atomic bombs, were considered by many as the biggest and most powerful interactions between Einstein and the US. The German occupation of Czechoslovakia had brought a halt to the sale of Uranium and evidence pointed to intensive nuclear research by German scientists. The two letters along with a third letter that resulted in the setting up of the Manhattan project – contents reproduced below –contributed significantly towards enormous atomic research effort in the US that ultimately tilted the scales in favor of the US in the race towards the first use of the atomic bomb.

Contents of the third letter (in part) :   “I am convinced as to the wisdom and the urgency of creating the conditions under which that and related work (referring to the research work of Szilard and Wigner) can be carried out with greater speed and on a larger scale than hitherto. I was interested in a suggestion made by Dr. Sachs that the Special Advisory Committee supply names of persons to serve as a board of trustees for a nonprofit organization which, with the approval of the government committee, could secure from governmental or private sources or both, the necessary funds for carrying out the work. Given such a framework and the necessary funds, it (the large scale experiments and exploration of practical applications) could be carried out much faster than through a loose cooperation of university laboratories and government departments.“


The nonprofit organization corresponds of course to the organization responsible for carrying out the Manhattan project . The letter was implemented briskly. The Briggs committee was drastically reorganized and brought under the wing of the National Defense Research committee created by Roosevelt, and a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences set up to inform the Government of any development of nuclear fission that might affect defense.

Though Einstein was an out and out pacifist, there was no way he could have not written these letters as the consequence of a German first use of atomic bombs might have been catastrophic. Had these letters not been written, we have no idea what would have been the history of the planet Earth for the last about 70 years.

For further reading:

  • `Einstein-The life and times` …   … By Ronald W.Clarke
  • `Some strangeness in the proportion – (chapter on `Albert Einstein – Encounter with America`) … … Edited by Harry Woolf.

More than 130,000 people worked on the Manhatten Project. The total cost of the project was in excess of $ 2 billion. It was operated entirely under a shroud of secrecy, so much so that President Harry S.Truman who took over the Presidency upon Roosevelt`s death in April 1945, had no knowledge of the Manhatten project prior to that.


For a comprehensive account of the dropping of the bombs and its impact on the world  I give below some extracts from the book “THE MANHATTEN PROJECT“… which is a groundbreaking collection of essays, articles, documents, and excerpts from histories, biographies, plays, novels, and letters on the subject… edited by Cynthia.C.Kelley:

“`On December 17th 1944 LT.Col Paul.W.Tibbets Jr, was given command of the newly created 509th composite  group of the Army-Air forces. Its top secret mission was to drop the World`s first atomic bombs. The unique shapes of the `LITTLE BOY` and `FAT MAN` Bombs required a great deal of testing with pumpkin bombs to ensure accurate flight after being dropped from specially modified B-29 planes. The 509th trained at a scheduled base in Wendover, before being sent to Tinian Island in the Marianas in May, June, and July 1945. At Tinian the Manhatten project recreated a little Manhattan, naming the roads after New York city streets.

The mission of the 509th was kept so secret that Admiral Chester W Nimitz, commander in chief of the Pacific theatre, did not know of the atomic bomb until February 1945. A target committee was convened in April and May 1945 to select a short list of Japanese cities as possible atomic bomb candidates. By the end of July the list included Hiroshima, Kokura, Niagata, and Nagasaki. Earlier secretary of war Harry Simpson  vetoed the ancient capital Kyoto with its magnificent shrines and temples. On July 25th 1945, official orders were issued to the 509th composite group to deliver its first atomic bomb as soon as weather will permit visual bombing after about 3 august 1945 on one of the targets…. Additional bombs will be delivered on the above targets as soon as made ready by project staff. The order was issued to General Carl Spatz, commanding general United States Army Strategic Air Forces, with the directive  that the discussion of any and all information concerning the use of the weapon against Japan is reserved to the Secretary of War and the President of the United States. It was signed by Thos.T.Handy General GSC Acting Chief of Staff. General Spatz was directed to personaly deliver  a copy to General MacArthur and another to Admiral Nimitz.

At 0245 Tinian time on Monday 6th August 1945, Col. Tibbets  and crew took off in the `ENOLA GAY`. As the crew approached the mainland of Japan, the weather was clear for the visual drop requirement. Col Ribbets described the final minutes before the drop:

` We made the final turn to 272 degrees magnetic course for 14 minutes (72NM). Major Ferebee (Group Bombardier) checked the bombing  sights and said “I have the aiming point in sight“. Capt Van Kirk (Navigator) checked and agreed. The crew put on the dark goggles and turned on the tone for the instrument plane to know exactly when the bomb was released. Two small corrections were made and we finally released the bomb.`

At precisely 17 seconds after 0815 Japan time , the Enola Gay released the first atomic bomb over the target of Hiroshima. The `Little boy` uranium fell from 31,600 feet, detonating 43 seconds later, 600 yards in the air over the city. In a millisecond, a force of 20000 tons of TNT was released, generating a fireball of heat equivalent to 300000 degrees Fahrenheit. The temperature at the ground beneath the burst reached an estimated 3000 to 4000 degrees centigrade, and the heat rays caused flesh burns upto 13000 feet away. Nearly 80000 people were killed instantly, and almost every building within a 2 mile radius was obliterated.

Historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa describes the utter devastation of the bomb in Japan in contrast to the sense of “overwhelming success“ in Washington DC as President Truman warned the Japanese to “expect a rain of ruin“ : `LITTLE BOY exploded 1900 feet above the courtyard of Shima Hospital, 550 feet off its target, Aioi Bridge over Ota River, with a yield of equivalent to 12500 tons of TNT. The temperature at ground zero reached 5400 degrees F, immediately creating a fireball within half a mile, roasting people “to bundles of smoking black char in a fraction of a second  as their internal organs boiled away“. Thousands of such charred bundles were strewn in the streets, sidewalks, and bridges. A man sitting on the steps of a bank waiting for it to open vaporized, leaving only his shadow on the granite steps. The blast that followed the explosion destroyed thousands of houses, burning most of them. Of 76,000 buildings in Hiroshima, 70,000 were destroyed. Fire broke out all over the city, devouring everything in its path. People walked aimlessly in eerie silence, many black with burns, the skin peeling from their bodies. Others frantically ran to look for their loved ones. Thousands of dead bodies floated in the river. Everywhere their was “massive pain, suffering, and horror“, unspeakable and unprecedented. Then the black rain fell, soaking everyone with radiation. Those who survived the initial shock began to die from radiation sickness. According to one study conducted by the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 110,000 civilians and 20,000 military personnel were killed instantly. By the end of 1945, 140,000 had perished.

When a report with the  message “Big bomb dropped on Hiroshima “ was handed over to President Truman by Captain Frank Graham of the White House Map Room, the President beamed. He jumped to his feet and shook hands with Graham. “Captain“ he said “this is the greatest thing in history“.

In a broadcast that evening, Don Goddard added a chilling concreteness to these ominous forebodings: ` There is reason to believe tonight that our new atomic bomb destroyed the entire Japanese city of Hiroshima in a single blast … It would be the same as Denver Colorado, with a population of 350,000 persons being there one moment, and wiped out the next`.

President Harry S Truman issued a statement immediately after the world`s first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. His statement unveiled the top secret Manhattan Project as an immense “scientific gamble“ and the “greatest achievement of organised science in history“. Looking ahead President Truman envisions the production and use of atomic energy for power within the Unites States and as a force for maintaining world peace. “` …  …   … End of extract

The Manhatten Project was successful.. It was an `Unsurpassed accomplishment of Science and an Engineering feat`. The US won the race for the first use of  the Atomic Bomb. On August 14, 1945, Japan surrendered unconditionally.  The second World War ended.

Frantic Build Up of Nuclear capabilities by powerful nations of the World, was a natural consequence, as was the urgency to ensure control of such build up by other nations, the NPT, the CTBT, the IAEA and the safeguards necessary to ensure that nuclear materials do not go into the wrong hands, the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, section 123 of the act pertaining to cooperation with other nations, the demand supply gap in energy, the necessity of more and more nations in the world to partake in the responsibility to ensure prevention of use of nuclear weapons, etc .


The Pugwash Conferences take their name from the fishing village of Pugwash, Nova Scotia, site of the first meeting in 1957 which was attended by 22 eminent scientists (seven from the United States, three each from the Soviet Union and Japan, two each from the United Kingdom and Canada, and one each from Australia, Austria, China, France, and Poland). The stimulus for this first Pugwash meeting was the “Manifesto” issued in 1955 by Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, and also signed by Max BornPercy Bridgman, Leopold Infeld, Frederic Joliot-CurieHerman MullerLinus PaulingCecil Powell, Joseph Rotblat, and Hideki Yukawa, which called upon scientists of all political persuasions to assemble to discuss the threat posed to civilization by the advent of thermonuclear weapons.

Extract from the Russell Einstein Manifesto :

“` In the tragic situation that confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to apprise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft.

We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent or creed, but as human beings, members of the species Man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full of conflicts; and overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between communism and anti-communism.

Almost everybody who is politically conscious  has strong feelings about one or more of these issues, but we want you, if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.

We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it.

We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learn to ask ourselves, not what steps can be taken to give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps, the question we have to ask ourselves is: What steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issue must be disastrous to all parties?

It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can now be manufactured which will be 2,500 times more powerful as that which destroyed Hiroshima. Such a bomb, if exploded near the ground or under water sends radioactive particles into the upper air. No one knows how widely such lethal radio-active particles might be diffused, but the best authorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H bombs might possibly put an  end to the human race. It is feared that if many H bombs are used, there will be universal death, sudden only for a minority, but for the majority, a slow torture of desease and disintegration.

Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that , if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether communist or anti-communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether White or Black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East and in the West.

Their lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we instead, choose death because we cannot forget our quarrels ?. We appeal as human beings to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death.

RESOLUTION:  We invite this Congress, and through it the scientists of the world and the general public, to subscribe to the following resolution: ` In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them consequently to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them`  “`….   end of extract.


The 1957 meeting was hosted by the American philanthropist Cyrus Eaton at Thinkers’ Lodge in Pugwash, his birthplace, and Mr. Eaton continued to provide crucial support for Pugwash in its early years.

From that beginning evolved both a continuing series of meetings at locations all over the world – with a growing number and diversity of participants – and a decentralized organizational structure to coordinate and finance this activity. By September 2002 there had been over 275 Pugwash Conferences, Symposia, and Workshops, with a total attendance of over 4,000 scientists and other individuals.

Pugwash convenes between 8 and 12 meetings a year, consisting of the large annual Conference, attended by 150 to 250 people, and the more frequent Workshops and Study Group meetings, which focus on specific issues and typically involve 20 to 50 participants. A basic rule is that participation is always by individuals in their private capacity (not as representatives of governments or organizations).

“ The purpose of the Pugwash Conferences is to bring together, from around the world, influential scientists, scholars and public figures concerned with reducing the danger of armed conflict and seeking cooperative solutions for global problems. Meeting in private as individuals, rather than as representatives of governments or institutions, Pugwash participants exchange views and explore alternative approaches to arms control and tension reduction, with a flexibility seldom attained in official East-West and North-South discussions and negotiations. Yet, because of the stature of many of the Pugwash participants in their own countries (as, for example, science and arms-control advisers to governments, key figures in academies of science and universities, and former and future holders of high government office), insights from Pugwash discussions tend to penetrate quickly to the appropriate levels of official policy-making.

The first two decades of Pugwash coincided with some of the most dangerous years of the Cold War, marked by the Berlin Crisis, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the repression of the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia, and the Vietnam War. In this period of strained official relations and few unofficial channels, the fora and lines of communication provided by Pugwash played useful background roles in helping lay the groundwork for the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963, the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 and SALT I accords, the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, the Intermediate-range theater Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty, as well as the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. Despite subsequent trends of generally improving East-West relations and the emergence of a much wider array of unofficial channels of communication, Pugwash meetings have continued to play an important role in bringing together key scientists, analysts and policy advisers for sustained, in-depth discussions of the crucial arms-control issues of the day, particularly in the areas of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. “…. From the Pug wash website



Joseph Rotblat was the main driving force behind the Pugwash movement.  A nuclear Scientist – par excellence – he worked for the Manhatten Project but left in controversial circumstances.

“The subsequent bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, intensified his ethical concern over the involvement of scientists in developing weapons of mass destruction, and drove him to become deeply involved in the antiwar movement.“… Andrew Brown .

The book “Keeper of the Nuclear Conscience“ written by Andrew Brown tells the story of Joseph Rotblat who dedicated his life to the furtherance of peace among nations, and above all the prevention of nuclear wars. It is also the story of a time of intense superpower rivalry, and a time when the scientists had the ear of presidents and premiers.


“It  is better for peace in the world if this is widely read.

Its a privilege to be the first – on Amazon –  to review this book of extraordinary significance.

Andrew Brown has written a masterpiece about the life and times of Joseph Rotblat, a nuclear scientist par excellence, whose excellence was demonstrated even more in making the scientists of his time to understand their ethical responsibility and leading them on to  play  a vital role in launching an ethical revolution. Joseph Rotblat dedicated his life for furtherance of peace among nations, and above all the prevention of nuclear wars. He was the main driving force behind the Pug wash movement – the conferences – which bring together from around the world, influential scientists, scholars and public figures concerned with the danger of armed conflicts,  to seek solutions for global problems.  The stimulus for these conferences was provided by a Manifesto issued by Einstein and Bertrand Russell in 1955.

The book is a historical review of events of the twentieth century .. not necessarily described in a sequential way. But all the essential information is there. The author has placed all the  cards  on the table with regard to what happened in the past.  How many times in the past has the emblematic clock moved closer to midnight just minutes before the pressing of the nuclear buttons ? How were the probabilities created to prevent the pressing of those buttons ?

Books like this should be in the private libraries of leaders of nations … no harm will be done if these leaders partake in the Pugwash movement … but not as members  of this or that nation, religion, or creed, but as human beings, whose continued existence is in doubt. As Einstein/Russell stated in their manifesto, they should consider themselves as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.

There is no doubt we are currently passing through a  dangerous time zone –  getting even more alarming as the population rises and resources crumble –  where we have about one hundred thousand nuclear warheads located at several locations on the planet Earth, and not all of them are in possession of `Safe Hands`. The probabilities must be created to come out safely from this time zone.

I reiterate once again that the significance of this book must not be underestimated.

It is better for peace in the world if it is widely read.“



This is best described with an extract from James Martin`s book …`The meaning of the 21st Century`

“`The 21st century is confronted with one of the greatest paradigm shifts in history – There will be no all out war between nuclear nations or no civilization.

Henry Kissinger observed that the greatest danger of nuclear war lies not in the deliberate actions of wicked men but in the inability of harassed men to manage events that have run away from them. This surely describes the future.

The world came shockingly close to nuclear war in 1962 with the Cuban missile crisis. In the defining moments of the crisis, the US blockaded a Soviet fleet to prevent it from going to Cuba. The Executive committee of US  who called the shots, was unaware that the  four Soviet submarines had nuclear weapons. At about 5 p.m. on 27th October 1962, an American ship, depth charged a soviet submarine, unaware that it had a nuclear weapon on board. The depth charge exploded next to the hull but did`nt penetrate the hull. The Russian Captain felt honour bound to retaliate and ordered that a nuclear weapon be launched at the Americans. To do so two other officers had to agree to the firing and turn their keys simultaneously. At the last moment, the second Captain Vassili Alexandrovich Arkhipov refused. If he had not done so there would have been a devastating nuclear war.

In the 1980s the game speeded up drastically. Cruise missiles – designed to carry nuclear warheads immensely more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb – were built. The nuclear command and control systems were designed so that at the very highest level of alert, nuclear retaliation would happen automatically with pre-programmed missiles. The situation becomes like that of the gun fighters of the classic westerns. Each wants to be `The fastest gun in the West ‘instantly ready to fire.

A major problem with the control of nuclear forces, however, is that the brains would be the first thing to be attacked. What happens if Washington and US president are destroyed?. What happens if the command and control systems are destroyed?. When the top level commanders are destroyed, lower level commanders have to take over, but then how are unauthorized firings prevented? “

Biological warfare – after a nuclear attack – with the release of large number of small bomblets spraying smallpox, anthrax, and deadly plagues on a massive scale to wipe out any shattered survivors of the nuclear devastation, is a distinct possibility.

A few hundred nuclear warheads are enough to destroy the entire human civilization and we have accumulated nearly a hundred thousand of them on the planet.

And there is no moral force acting against this… No outrage shown by the Church …or by religious leaders of any religion against this massive accumulation.

Nations in conflict are always in a state of readiness…and if a suspicious activity is detected…a preemptive strike to prevent from being attacked becomes highly likely.“`   ….James Martin


Extract from “Keeper of the Nuclear Conscience“…by Andrew Brown:  

“`Khrushchev brought the world to the edge of the abyss by installing Soviet Missiles with nuclear warheads in Cuba, in the most provocative and perilous trial of nuclear deterrence. Rotblat`s response was to transmit a cable signed by American Pugwash Scientists to their colleagues in Moscow, asking them to urge the Soviet Government to reroute the ships approaching Cuba which were thought to be carrying more weapons. For their part the Americans would do their utmost to persuade the Kennedy administration from taking precipitate action. Over several days Jo was in almost continuous  telephonic communication with Washington and Moscow  trying to organize  an emergency meeting of US and Soviet senior scientists in London. The intensity of the near catastrophe spurred both leaders to new disarmament efforts in the face of strident internal opposition.“`   … Andrew Brown.



“`The international climate deteriorated significantly during the years 1980 and 81. Although the Americans and Soviets signed SALT II (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty), it was dead on arrival at US senate for ratification, largely because of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. Both superpowers increased deployment of new missile sytems in Europe and departed from the defensive posture of nuclear deterrence to declare nuclear war thinkable. Joseph Rotblat dismissed President Carter`s notion of limited nuclear war as an `asinine excuse` for escalating the nuclear arms race, and warned a `thinkable` war would soon become an all out holocaust. At the same meeting, another prominent Pugwashite Patricia Lindop delivered a `stirring speech` which was greeted with thunderous applause. In January 1981, the editors of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists advanced the hands on its emblematic clock forward from seven minutes to four minutes before midnight in the light of deteriorating super power relations and against a background of an annual global armament budget of $600 billion and the existence of sixty thousand nuclear warheads. Writing in the same edition of the Bulletin, Rotblat concentrated on the increased sophistication and `fantastic precision` of modern weapons that threatened to bring an unanswerable first-strike option into play again. `The notion that one side can choose to wage a limited nuclear war is absolute nonsense` he wrote, explaining why any use of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe was bound to escalate. Attacks on military targets in cities in the war zone would lead inevitably to attacks on targets in the adversary`s homeland, to be followed eventually by a massive exchange. `One side can start a war` he said `but it takes two sides to keep it limited`. He thought governments were trying systematically to condition the public to accept the possibility of limited nuclear war, partly through promoting civil defence again as with the `Protect and Survive` campaign in the UK.“… Andrew Brown.


Reagen`s plan of designing a defense system that would intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missile before they reach American soil. In essence, It was more like an offensive system aimed at `mopping-up` any Soviet missiles fired in retaliation, after an American first – strike. Russians would doubtless consider such an anti-missile system as part of a first strike weapon aimed at them. Mainstream American Scientists and all the Pugwashites in the US vehemently criticized the initiative.



In January 1986 Mikhail Gorbachov prepared the text of a three stage plan to eliminate all nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth  by end of 1999. He sent a  letter to Reagan with his three stage plan. Appropriate response from Reagan was not forthcoming. Reagen persisted in talking about the SDI development and did not join the Soviets in a nuclear test moratorium.

In April of the same year ..“There was the devastating fire at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor, which served to reinforce Gorbachev`s antinuclear sentiments. Two weeks after the catastrophe, he pointed out during a televised speech that it `showed again what an abyss will open if nuclear war befalls mankind`. The impact of the fire was considered equal to the German invasion of 1941, and after Chernobyl it was believed `the nuclear danger ceased to be just something abstract, it became tangible, concrete“..A Brown

The nuclear reactor accidents and radiation hazards became serious topics for discussion in the subsequent Pugwash conferences.

Gorbachov was always very serious about immediate deep cuts in the arsenals of both superpowers, and in the aftermath of Chernobyl, Moscow was `so scared of `accidental war`, that a special unit was formed in the Chief of Staff machinery to deal with the problem on a continuing basis`.

In December 1988 Mikhail Gorbochov gave a speech of historical significance at the UN in New York.

“It seemed to lift the Iron curtain whose descent Churchill described so memorably four decades before. While he may have lacked Churchill`s grandiloquence, the content of Gorbachov`s  speech was  detailed and bold. He announced the unilateral shrinkage of Soviet armed forces by five hundred thousand men with commensurate reductions in conventional armaments within two years, and the withdrawal of six tank divisions from Eastern European states within three. He explained that these and other fallbacks to clearly defensive positions were in line with the new `principle of reasonable defense sufficiency“… A Brown

. Once again the reciprocal response from US was not forthcoming at all. George HW bush did not grasp the epoch ending status of Gorbachov`s speech, nor did the final departure of Soviet troops from Afghanistan in February 1989 convince it. Gorbachov still intent on nuclear disarmament , wanted to eliminate all short-range or `tactical` nuclear weapons from Europe and announced the unilateral withdrawal  of five hundred warheads in May. Still no response from US except to remark that `Gorbachov was throwing out arms control proposals like a drugstore cowboy. However the Bush administration did  enter negotiations that would culminate in the Conventional Armed Forces Treaty (CFE) within  a short space of two years.


Joseph Rotblat and Pugwash shared the Nobel Prize for Peace for 1995. He delivered his acceptance speech “Remember your humanity“ and was rewarded with a standing ovation. Following the reward, Rotblat became a public figure. He was lauded as the conscience of nuclear science and invited to lectures all over  the World. In his Nobel lecture, Rotblat gave his customary emphasis to the social responsibility of scientists, suggesting also that `whistle blowing` should become part of the scientist`s ethos.


A certain Vanunu served an 18 year sentence in solitary confinement for revealing details to the Sunday Times about plutonium manufacture at the Damona Nuclear Plant in Israel, where he had worked as a technician. His disclosures could not be refuted by the Israeli Government and exposed a large hole in their policy of nuclear opacity. Rotblat played a predominant role in the campaign to free Vanunu. He gave a seminar entitled “Swimming against the current: Responsible Dissidence“, taking as his exemplar Sakharov, whom he credited with exposing the hypocrisy of the Soviet Union over nuclear disarmament during the cold war. Rotblat considered Vanunu`s act as a generational act for the world, not a malicious attempt to harm Israel.



At a meeting in New York, Rotblat presented a memo on the rationale, prerequisites and implementation of a NWFW (Nuclear Weapons Free World). It contained ten essential points.

  1. Nuclear disarmament is a legal obligation under article 6 of the NPT.
  2. Reduction to a few hundred weapons is not acceptable because it is not stable and it will not stick. The only stable situation is zero.
  3. The most succinct reason for elimination is McNamara’s `…The indefinite combination of human fallibility and nuclear weapons carries a high risk of a potential catastrophe.`
  4. Nuclear Weapons Convention (NWC) should be based on the Chemical Weapons Convention and make possession a crime under international law.
  5. NWC should be universal and once ratified by a certain number of states should become mandatory on all others. No provision for withdrawal.
  6. Outlaw all secret research.
  7. Have a clause mandating all states to pass national laws calling on citizen`s to notify an international authority of any attempt to violate the convention.
  8. Will only come about if the 5 NWS (Nuclear Weapons States) agree its in their interest and so it is unlikely that they will violate the NWC by retaining some nuclear weapons.
  9. Attempts to violate the NWC by a rogue state can and will be dealt with by conventional military forces only. Any decision about enforcement would be taken by UN Security Council.
  10. International authority to monitor progress of dismantlement and implementation. All states where weapons-useable fissile material exists – whether civilian or military – will be internationally supervised and guarded.


Notwithstanding the enormous contribution of Pugwash in reducing the cold war conflicts, the geopolitics of the world other than the US – SOVIET world, has remained largely unaffected by the Pugwash movement. Leaders of nations in general are generally unaware of the Pugwash conferences … or may be indifferent to them.



This is best described in an extract from `Engaging India : Diplomacy, Democracy and the Bomb`…by Strobe Talbot ( taken from Google)

“` During the first week in June [1999], just as Milosevic was acceding to NATO’s demands over Kosovo, Clinton turned his own attention to India and Pakistan. In letters to Nawaz Sharif and Vajpayee, the president went beyond the studied neutrality that both prime ministers were expecting—in Pakistan’s case with hope, and in India’s with trepidation. Clinton made Pakistan’s withdrawal a precondition for a settlement and the price it must pay for the U.S. diplomatic involvement it had long sought. Clinton followed up with phone calls to the two leaders in mid-June emphasizing this point. The United States condemned Pakistan’s “infiltration of armed intruders” and went public with information that most of the seven hundred men who had crossed the Line of Control were attached to the Pakistani Army’s 10th Corps.

In late June Clinton called Nawaz Sharif to stress that the United States saw Pakistan as the aggressor and to reject the fiction that the fighters were separatist guerrillas. The administration let it be known that if Sharif did not order a pullback, we would hold up a $100 million International Monetary Fund loan that Pakistan sorely needed. Sharif went to Beijing, hoping for comfort from Pakistan’s staunchest friend, but got none.

Pakistan was almost universally seen to have precipitated the crisis, ruining the promising peace process that had begun in Lahore and inviting an Indian counteroffensive.

On Friday, July 2, Sharif phoned Clinton and pleaded for his personal intervention in South Asia. Clinton replied that he would consider it only if it was understood up-front that Pakistani withdrawal would have to be immediate and unconditional.

The next day Sharif called Clinton to say that he was packing his bags and getting ready to fly immediately to Washington—never mind that he had not been invited. ..He warned Sharif not to come unless he was prepared to announce unconditional withdrawal; otherwise, his trip would make a bad situation worse. The Pakistani leader did not accept Clinton’s condition for the meeting—he just said he was on his way.

“This guy’s coming literally on a wing and a prayer,” said the president.” That’s right,” said Bruce Riedel [NSC aide], “and he’s praying that we don’t make him do the one thing he’s got to do to end this thing.”

It was not hard to anticipate what Sharif would ask for. His opening proposal would be a cease-fire to be followed by negotiations under American auspices. His fallback would make Pakistani withdrawal conditional on Indian agreement to direct negotiations sponsored and probably mediated by the United States. Either way, he would be able to claim that the incursion had forced India, under American pressure, to accept Pakistani terms.

After several long meetings in Sandy Berger’s office, we decided to recommend that Clinton confront Sharif with a stark choice that included neither of his preferred options. We would put before him two press statements and let Sharif decide which would be released at the end of the Blair House talks. The first would hail him as a peacemaker for retreating—or, as we would put it euphemistically, “restoring and respecting the sanctity of the Line of Control.” The second would blame him for starting the crisis and for the escalation sure to follow his failed mission to Washington.

On the eve of Sharif’s arrival, we learned that Pakistan might be preparing its nuclear forces for deployment. There was, among those of us preparing for the meeting, a sense of vast and nearly unprecedented peril. When Clinton assembled his advisers in the Oval Office for a last minute huddle, Sandy told him that overnight we had gotten more disturbing reports of steps Pakistan was taking with its nuclear arsenal. Clinton said he would like to use this information “to scare the hell out of Sharif.”

Sandy told the president that he was heading into what would probably be the single most important meeting with a foreign leader of his entire presidency. It would also be one of the most delicate. The overriding objective was to induce Pakistani withdrawal. But another, probably incompatible, goal was to increase the chances of Sharif’s political survival. “If he arrives as a prime minister but stays as an exile,” said Sandy, “he’s not going to be able to make stick whatever deal you get out of him.” We had to find a way to provide Sharif just enough cover to go home and give the necessary orders to Musharraf and the military.

The conversation had already convinced Clinton of what he feared: the world was closer even than during the Cuban missile crisis to a nuclear war. Unlike Kennedy and Khrushchev in 1962, Vajpayee and Sharif did not realize how close they were to the brink, so there was an even greater risk that they would blindly stumble across it.

Adding to the danger was evidence that Sharif neither knew everything his military high command was doing nor had complete control over it. When Clinton asked him if he understood how far along his military was in preparing nuclear-armed missiles for possible use in a war against India, Sharif acted as though he was genuinely surprised. He could believe that the Indians were taking such steps, he said, but he neither acknowledged nor seemed aware of anything like that on his own side.

Clinton decided to invoke the Cuban missile crisis, noting that it had been a formative experience for him (he was sixteen at the time). Now India and Pakistan were similarly on the edge of a precipice. If even one bomb were used…Sharif finished the sentence: “. . . it would be a catastrophe.”

[Clinton] returned to the offensive. He could see they were getting nowhere. Fearing that might be the result, he had a statement ready to release to the press in time for the evening news shows that would lay all the blame for the crisis on Pakistan.

Sharif went ashen.

Clinton bore down harder. Having listened to Sharif’s complaints against the United States, he had a list of his own, and it started with terrorism. Pakistan was the principal sponsor of the Taliban, which in turn allowed Osama bin Laden to run his worldwide network out of Afghanistan. Clinton had asked Sharif repeatedly to cooperate in bringing Osama to justice. Sharif had promised to do so but failed to deliver. The statement the United States would make to the press would mention Pakistan’s role in supporting terrorism in Afghanistan—and, through its backing of Kashmiri militants, in India as well. Was that what Sharif wanted?

Clinton had worked himself back into real anger—his face flushed, eyes narrowed, lips pursed, cheek muscles pulsing, fists clenched. He said it was crazy enough for Sharif to have let his military violate the Line of Control, start a border war with India, and now prepare nuclear forces for action. On top of that, he had put Clinton in the middle of the mess and set him up for a diplomatic failure.

Sharif seemed beaten, physically and emotionally. He denied he had given any orders with regard to nuclear weaponry and said he was worried for his life.

When the two leaders had been at it for an hour and a half, Clinton suggested a break so that both could consult with their teams. The president and Bruce briefed Sandy, Rick, and me on what had happened. Now that he had made maximum use of the “bad statement” we had prepared in advance, Clinton said, it was time to deploy the good one. ..Clinton took a cat nap on a sofa in a small study off the main entryway while Bruce, Sandy, Rick, and I cobbled together a new version of the “good statement,” incorporating some of the Pakistani language from the paper that Sharif had claimed was in play between him and Vajpayee. But the key sentence in the new document was ours, not his, and it would nail the one thing we had to get out of the talks: “The prime minister has agreed to take concrete and immediate steps for the restoration of the Line of Control.” The paper called for a cease-fire but only after the Pakistanis were back on their side of the line. It reaffirmed Clinton’s longstanding plan to visit South Asia.

The meeting came quickly to a happy and friendly end, at least on Clinton’s part.

…   … Strobe Talbot



In January 2003, in a symposium on `Science and Beyond`, Professor M.S.Swaminatan who was at the time the President of `Pugwash movement`, in his talk on `Science, Peace, and sustainable development` delivered a sterling message:

“Scientists and technologists have a particularly vital role to play in launching an Ethical revolution. The Pugwash movement, which I now have the privilege to lead, is an expression of the social and moral duty of scientists to promote the beneficial applications of their work, and prevent their misuse, to anticipate and evaluate the possible unintended consequences of scientific and technological development, and to promote debate and reflection of the `ethical obligations of scientists in taking responsibility for their work`. It will be appropriate to quote in this context, what Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein said in their famous manifesto of 1955, issued on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the use of atom bombs on Hirashima and Nagasaki:

` We appeal as human beings to human beings. Remember your humanity and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death`

Shall we renounce war and violence as a method of settling disputes, or shall we put an end to the human civilization ? This is the question facing us today. We are witnessing a growing intolerance of diversity and pluralism in human societies, as for example in terms of religion, ethnicity, political belief, color, culture, gender and language. The confluence of science and religion should be reflected in all areas of human enquiry. The growing violence in the human heart that we witness today underlines the urgency of ensuring  that science   and technology are employed for human happiness and not its destruction. The Pugwash movement has been constantly reminding scientists of their ethical responsibility for the consequences of their research and governments of the immorality, illegality, and peril inherent in nuclear weapons.“ …. M S Swaminathan


In the same seminar the Great Scientist and Philosopher Charles Townes gave the following message :

“ There are two fundamental reasons why I believe that religion and science must be parallel and must interact. One is that, if there is purpose and meaning in the universe, then the purpose must be related to its structure –  and in fact must determine its structure. The second is that in both fields we use all our human abilities in a quest to understand the world we inhabit. Religion and science are more similar in terms of our efforts to understand than we normally think. Among the general public, it is very common to believe that scientists simply design their experiments, write their equations, use logic, and then conclude, objectively and without questioning, what the truth is. And that is it. Religion on the other hand is often viewed as a matter of faith alone. In this view religion is about things we do not know and cannot prove, things that belong to the domain of the emotions. In fact, though we use all our human abilities in both endeavours. In both realms, we want to understand. The Noble Laureate scientist, Bridgman of Harvard University, who was also known as something of a philosopher as well, was once asked to define the scientific method. Bridgman said: `The scientific method?, that is to work like the devil to find the answer, with no holds barred`, well, that is just what it is. We use our every instinct, our every ability, to do the best science of which we are capable. I deeply believe that the same is true in religion. The emphasis may be different, but the striving to understand is similar. And this striving to understand , using all our abilities, represent a broad parallel  between these two great activities of the human spirit.“… Charles Townes.



The subject  must be understood from a neutral perspective:

How would  a neutral figure  such as a being from outer space ( lets call him `F` )  who has watched all the proceedings and has a complete knowledge and understanding of all the conflicts on  the planet Earth address the problems in a way that is as far as possible acceptable to all concerned? It is assumed of course that `F` understands human nature and is perfectly aware that a typical human being anywhere in the World wants to live in peace and that the average moral standard  is the same in all countries and does not differ from country to country as it is not a measure of `temperature` or `humidity’. The average quotient “qx“ pertaining to the desire `to live and let live` is also generally the same for all countries. It is a requirement for peace in the world that the corresponding quotient “qy“ pertaining to the leaders of nations must be well above `qx`. That this is not the case in some countries is the reason behind conflicts and wars particular `civil wars`. It is the `Interactions of the world` which lead to the coming together of millions of atoms and molecules and becoming  a speck of jelly, and it is the same phenomena that is responsible for the said speck of jelly to go on to become either Hitler or Gandhi or Einstein or you and me. And the same phenomena is responsible for some leaders of nations ending up with `qy` substantially below the required level.

A serious understanding of the laws of causation is necessary to understand the sequence of events that is responsible for the current status relating to the geopolitics of the World. It is the information in the field which is responsible for the phenomena.

With all this it does not serve the purpose if we call a certain country – which is just a geographical area – as a terrorist state and another country – another geographical area –  as a  `Selfish and arrogant policeman`, when we know that it is the leaders of nations  – having low `qy` -who must be held responsible for bringing their nations to such disrepute.

But the common man should not suffer on account of the low `qy` value of his country`s leaders.

Therefore `F` should first understand how the common man from the various countries finds himself entangled in these complex and dangerous situations for no fault of his and how he can  be extricated  from these entangled states.

Hence the main requirement in the analysis is to identify the leaders of nations who had … or who have … or who could have in the future … a negligibly low `Qy` who were …or who are… or who could be in the future .. dangerous for the world, particularly so if they had … or if they have .. or may have in the future … access to Nuclear Arsenal .

As an example … to drive home the point that I am making … consider the case of Adolf Hitler whose `Qy` was  always  extremely low. Now  if Germany  had won the race towards first  use of the Atomic bomb, it is distinctly possible he would not have limited to just a couple of strikes, it is quite likely he may have struck multiple times in multiple countries and caused catastrophic damage world wide. As it happened Germany was defeated in the  war, and Hitler was about to commit suicide… If at this stage .. when his `Qy` would have reached near `zero` level …if, he  ( somehow )had in possession the same quantum of Nuclear Arsenal …which Germany has now … he would surely have  made full use of that and perhaps destroyed the human civilization.


Now we can not blame Germany … which is just a geographical area … for this. The common man in Germany with an average `Qx` which may  not be lower than the average `Qx` in the rest of the world, would not be responsible. It is the `Qy` of the leaders …in particular of the supreme leader  that matters.


It can happen in the future… in the not too distant future. … The nuclear arsenal can go into the wrong hands…. The hands of the terrorists…. and increase their power and capacity to cause damage. But substantially more dangerous than that is the distinct likelyhood of `Powerful hands making wrong use of the arsenal which is already in their possession.


The available Nuclear Arsenal  in the world is about a thousand times more than the quantity required to destroy the entire human race, with each of the five most powerful nations in possession of more than fifty times the required quantum to finish the human race.


Look at the  possibilities… In twenty to twenty five years, when China overtakes America in terms of power, and a situation far more dangerous than the `Cold War Of The Sixties`  develops, with Russia, China, and probably India on one side and the rest of the World on the other side, with the Middle East getting Sandwiched in between.

Look at the Randomness coeffiecient… coupled with possible innumerable `Ferdinand moments` taking place in various corners of the world, adding to the Chaos. Look at the distinct possibility of a ` Bush like powerful national leader` …losing face badly… getting humiliated… and experiencing a sudden and massive fall in his already low `Qy` value and then getting harassed… enough to consider blowing off the entire world with more than the required arsenal available at his disposal to do so.

The task here is to analyse  — with a serious understanding of the laws of causation — all the `Information in the Field` , understand what happened in the past, how it happened, what is happening now, and what can happen in the future. Who are the leaders of nations whose `Qy` is falling, and what `good sense` should prevail that can raise these `Qys` to safe levels.

The subject is discussed under three headings:


America was once  considered the best place in the world to be in.

In the words of Einstein:

“It has an internatio­nal `psyche`. it constitute­s the bulwark of the democratic way of life, it has demonstrat­ed that individual freedom provides a better basis for productive labor than any form of tyranny, its political and economic position is so powerful that it can help the world by breaking the tradition of war from which the world suffered“­…

All that has changed now. Having become rich and powerful, America also tended to become selfish and arrogant, selfish in the sense that it started grabbing a disproport­ionately higher share of the world`s resources and arrogant in the sense that in order to ensure the safety and security of its own people, America took recourse to large scale interferen­ces in the affairs of other countries. And these interferences were so manipulated so as to create rifts between nations interfered with, or between two segments of the same nation interfered with…. And then to add salt to injury … give a blind eye to these rifts

Once again it is reiterated that it is the leaders of nation … in this case the American POTUSes in particular of the Republican variety – with an extremely low `Qy` value  – who are to be blamed for all these interferences. The American public which is by and large quite sensitive is NOT to be blamed.

Having said that… let us discuss the subject of the `American approach`in the context of its impact in `creating rifts and escalating conflicts` in a world which is already in a chaotic state, caused by religious intolerance and  extremism.

American interferences in the Middle East where they preferred dictatorships to secular liberal democracies, so that it could easily make common cause with the dictators and grab the country`s resources, is responsible for disenchantment of the common people in these countries and consequent unrest.

Its an established fact that the United States … with the kind help of Israel …did not allow secular nationalism to prevail in many countries in the Middle East… Rather they destroyed secular nationalism. And this helped create Islamic fundamentalist extremism.

It would not be out of place to provide here some extracts from Noam Chomsky`s book `What we say goes` which is considered by `NEW STATESMAN` as a thorough tour of today`s geopolitical horizon:

“If you destroy secular nationalism, people aren`t going to just say : `Ok cut my throat`. They are going to turn somewhere else. And that somewhere else has been extremist religious fanaticism.

In fact sometimes these movements are actively encouraged. Since the second world war, the US has been the world`s strongest outside supporter of extremist Islamist fundamentalism. Washington`s oldest and most valued ally in the Arab World is Saudi Arabia. Iran looks like a democratic heaven in comparison. The threat to Saudi Arabian religious extremist tyranny was secular nationalism, mainly embodied by Gamal Abdel Nasser. So Nasser became an enemy because he threatened the US base of extremist religious fundamentalism, Saudi Arabia, which happens to control the oil, the underlying reason. In 1967, Israel performed a huge service to the United States, to Saudi Arabia, and the energy corporations by essentially eliminating secular Arab nationalism which was threatening to use the resources of the region for the needs of its own population.

The same thing has happened time after time. Israel created Hamas by destroying the secular Palestine Liberation Organisation, which was calling for negotiations and settlement. Since that was the last thing US and Israel wanted, they destroyed it. And then what happened? The population didn`t disintegrate, they turned to something else, in this case religious fundamentalism.

The US base of extremist religious fundamentalism received a further shot in the arm by the US when they organised them to fight the Russians in Afghanistan…not for the Afghan`s…but against the cold war enemy“

. … Noam Chomsky

That all the terrorist organizations created and initially supported by US turned full circle against America and the West was not a surprise for America, suited America very well. It now gave America  authentic grounds to fight against terrorism and enhanced its scope for further Interferences as and when it liked and provided its Military Industrial Complex with assured business and growth … never mind if it  was paid for by the American taxpayer.

By far the single most act of blundering error of judgement (  or stupidity ) was George Bush`s invasion of Iraq in 2003, resulting in more than two hundred thousand civilian deaths, and responsible for the current civil wars in Iraq and Syria.

According to Rotbalt :

“Neither of the three reasons advanced for the launch of the attacks .. viz to eliminate Saddam`s weapons of mass destruction, to destroy the link with Al Quida, to overthrow a bad regime was acceptable to the World. The main reason was that the USA was pursuing global dominance intermittently since the second world war. From the very beginning the development of nuclear weapons was used to give the US a dominant position in the World. At the beginning they were determined not to allow any other nation to have nuclear weapons.“ He believed President Bush`s disregard , for arms control treaties, coupled with an interest in developing new nuclear warheads, threatened the progress made in nuclear disarmament over the previous two decades. In regard to morality and equity in World affairs…as told by Rotblat… “it is the US that has to be called to order. It is intolerable that in this day and age, the mightiest country in the world should have declared, that its overriding motivation in International affairs was the self-interest of the USA. I cannot help the feeling that selfishness and greed – which became the driving force after the victory of capitalism in the ideological struggle  – are to some extent responsible for the terrible carnage that we have just witnessed “… Jo Rotblat

That the  current Civil war in Iraq and Syria is also a consequence of American Interferences is not difficult to understand. It is known to all. No analyst would think otherwise. The invasion resulted in tens of thousands of civilian casualties. Friends and relatives of those killed .. of a particular faction `Sunnis`.. became terrorists… so it became a justification to fight them … a Government and a local army was installed  to fight remnant terrorism..this army was predominantly made up of another faction `Shias` but had several `Sunnies` too, at the behest of the Bush Government the Sunnies were thrown out of the Iraq Army. They had no jobs and no where to go. They became victims of time caused by the interactions of the World. We can understand their mindset. We can also understand the sudden and substantial fall in their `Qx` values. So when the American forces withdrew from Iraq.. which turned out to be  a great error of judgement by Obama …Those of them who were in possession of weapons as well as of substantially low `Qx` became terrorists … Others of their faction acquired weapons and joined them, others did not join them as fighters but simply supported them. They are in control of large areas in Iraq as well as Syria. They are called `ISIS`. There is nothing  religious about them or about their actions. As explained earlier, they are all made up of disgruntled people, insecure and unhappy victims of time caused by the `IOTW`. They pick up `disgruntled young people` from all over the world..mostly from Europe… sympathise with them  and entice them to join them. If the essence of religion ..any religion .. is `To live and let live` and to live in peace and harmony .. then there is nothing religious in what they do… but they do take advantage of the contradictions in their religious document… which according to their own interpretations permits them to indulge in Jihad against Non Muslims. The trouble is they perform Jihad not just against Non Muslims, but also against Muslims of other factions… including those of their own faction who do not support them.

Their philosophy is simple :  If you join them are safe and secure from them …you will be provided weapons.. and all you have to do ..during working hours… is to perform Jihad against the non muslims ( or Muslims of other factions) …this is what their God wants them to do… and if they die in the process.. they are promised a place in heaven by the same God… and to convince them they show passages from their religious documents. It goes without saying.. that this philosophy can be  appealing to many young people who are disgruntled and unhappy with their lives, and don`t mind the change.

Result …there are now tens of thousands of people in Iraq and Syria with substantially low `Qx`, and they have  leaders with  a ridiculously low `Qy`. Now.. if these leaders can lay their hands on Nuclear weapons .. It is a no brainer that they will utilize them  to the full extent that they can do so.

The extent of complexity in the Middle East … consequent of course on the American Interferences … can be gauged from the fact that sometimes it is possible  that the United States and Al Quida might have been on the same side side of the net, as may have happened if the  US had attacked Syria in September 2013 in response to Assad`s use of chemical weapons against his own people.. the rebels.


Consider the relations between India and Pakistan.

Hindus and Muslims have  lived together for centuries, they all look alike, they  speak the same language, they sing the same songs, they watch the same movies, they have the same passion for Cricket, and I can go on and on.  There is no denying that the common people of the two countries would like to live in friendship and peaceful coexistence with each other. This is denied to them and the only agencies coming in the way are the Armies referred above particular the Pakistan Army  and its common cause with the  network of the `Military Industrial Complex` of the US of A. Here too the American Interferences and subsequent blind eying  have played their part  in a big way  in preventing  the improvement of relations between the two countries. It  is true  India and Pakistan have some misunderstandings.  There have been wars between them.  There are complexities involved…. Such as Kashmir. These are not insurmountable  and If left alone they can be resolved,  provided there are no interferences …and no blind eyes after interfering…. provided also that the Pakistan Army is under control of its civilian leadership that wants `To live and let live` with its Indian counterpart. The trouble is …neither of these `provisions` are forthcoming. The Pakistan Army is in total control over policies concerning national security particularly in respect of  its enmity with India. I doubt if this enmity with India  ( of the Pak Army … not the  common people ) will reduce even if the Kashmir issue is resolved.

And as for American interferences they began with Ronald Reagen`s support to the Pak army`s policies on India. As Noam Chomsky said his book “What we say goes“:

“In Pakistan , the movement relating to radical islamism began with former president Muhammed Zia Ul Haq, who was strongly supported by the Reagan administration. In fact, all through its tenure, the Reagan administration pretended that Zia wasn`t developing nuclear weapons. Of course they knew  that he was.But every year they would religiously certify that Pakistan was not developing  nuclear weapons,   because they wanted to support their radical extremist fundamentalist friend. They knew perfectly well that Saudi Arabia was funding the extremist madrassas, the religious schools that undermined the Pakistani educational system, which had been pretty good beforehand. You could not get students to study sciences, because schools teach only the Koran. That wasn`t true in the past. All these developments were supported by the Reagen administration.“ …. Noam Chomsky.

All this is blind eying… I think.

Consider the  US Drone  Strikes in Pakistan:

Now It is not possible that the US is unaware of the fact that a substantial portion of American aid to Pakistan for fighting militancy is going towards strengthening and expanding its nuclear arsenal.

The US of A cannot be unaware of the fact that US and Pak are partners in fighting terrorism of only one kind,  viz related to Al Qaida/Taliban considered dangerous for the West, and the US is not unduly concerned  about terrorism inside Pakistan itself, or Terrorism directed against India, or about the possibility that a few more 26/11 type of attacks could test India`s patience  leading India to target the terror camps in Pak territory, ultimately leading to the use of nuclear force by certain elements in Pak.

All this is blind eyeing I think.

Now consider the predicament of the common man in Pakistan , he was doing fine for several decades after getting independence – never mind sometimes fighting and sometimes playing Cricket with his Indian friend – but suddenly found terrorists in his land… towards his west …. Where did they come from?….. Driven out from Iraq and Afghanistan of course…. And then to compound it all, a certain section of the population ( Taliban) with a different ideology decided to support the terrorists…not to mention play host to them….Now I will come back to talk about these  categories  of people and to show that they too were once the common people on the street, and how they got entangled into the mess for no fault of theirs, and what `F` our being from outer space should do to extricate these people from this entangled state without using drones….. but first consider the situation of these unfortunate victims of time.

What happens … when a drone strikes?

Its all  in line with expectations…

Viz…It kills people  – intentionally designed to be killed – not because there exists a remote possibility that they might have been involved in the 9/11 attacks…but because of a remote probability that they may in future make plans for terrorist strikes.

It kills innocent people – not intentionally designed to be killed – as the   drones cannot distinguish to which category the victims belong to.

It puts the common man  in Pakistan exposed to an ever increasing probability of domestic terrorism.

It reduces the already depleted chance of a reconciliation with Taliban and widens the rift between the two factions of Muslims.

It puts the leaders of Pakistan in a hopeless situation… How will they face the public? …They may pretend to condemn the strike and show that it is a violation of their sovereignty, but in truth they have facilitated these strikes in return for having accepted payments for them. The combined negative potential of leaders of two nations is utilized to kill people ….. Available to be killed as sitting ducks…. Without even a semblance of a trial.

It puts the common man in America – particularly the sensitive type – in a terrible predicament. He has to carry the stigma that he belongs to a nation whose leaders are engaged in war crimes and it makes it even     worse for him when he realizes that he is paying for all this with his taxes.

It puts the terrorist further and further away from becoming a normal human being. Once he `WAS` indeed a normal human being… with a mom and dad, brothers and sisters….and then became a victim of time caused by the interactions of the world…. Poverty, no job, no food.

All terrorists in the world are victims of time … victims of the interactions of the world … The information in the field says:   Their only hope of salvation… become suicide bombers…. Kill some more   …get some job satisfaction ….And get out of this rotten world…. What else is there to do?

Religion has nothing to do with it … but a certain interpretation of the religious document… makes them feel comfortable in performing Jihad … and if they die… a place in heaven is promised to them by their leaders.

Its a natural selection virus called “To live and let die` that enters minds and causes  conflicts and wars, that has infected the minds of the leaders, and they are injecting the virus into the minds and bodies of normal innocent human beings in such a way as to create a different kind of virus called `to die and let die`.

Qx of these people and the `Qy` of there leaders is near zero… if Nuclear Arsenal falls in their hands… They will surely use it…thats for sure.

However.. the availability of Nuclear Weapons with the two armies seems to have altered the very nature of war between the two countries, as explaine below:


Given below is an extract from `V.R.Raghavn`s  review of the book “INDIA`S SENTINEL` which is about AirCommodore Jasjit Singh`s select writings on the subject:

“ On nuclear deterrence Jasjit was a pioneer in highlighting the limits nuclear weapons placed on fighting wars. He was emphatic that the `sheer existence of nuclear weapons with both adversaries imposes major limitations on the way force and violence can be used against each other without risking a nuclear exchange. This alters the very nature of war`. This axiom was soon proved in the Kargil when Pakistan used its army to occupy the heights on and across the LOC. This had led to an Indian response which was executed bearing in mind Jasjit`s warning on the nuclear weapons. This had in turn led to a wide ranging debate on fighting a `limited war` under a nuclear overhang. While the debate is yet inconclusive, it nevertheless proves the merit of the argument that nuclear weapons have indeed changed the way war will be fought by two nuclear adversaries.“… V.R.Raghavan

Military force is no longer the answer… conflict through terrorism is considered more effective by the Pak Army.. not to mention substantially cheaper. The extract continued :

“ Pakistan army believes terror is an instrument of state policy, for which as Jasjit Singh`s writings show, military force is not the answer. The belief that Pakistan can be weaned from this strategy by concessions through appeasement and by talks about talks is seen by many as a misplaced notion. Pakistan has changed rapidly in the last decade and is currently in a state of political and economic uncertainties.“… V.R.Raghavan


Thermonuclear missile launch near Los Angeles is final sign of World War III on the precipice… US, China and Russia all escalating covert attacks in run up to global war

NaturalNews) “A mysterious bright light in the sky has sent Californians into panic,” reports the BBC. “Videos posted online show a bright flare rising high, before a wide, bright blue flash emerges in a cone shape. Many videos continue to track the light for several minutes.”

Last night, Californians immediately leapt to social media to propose their theories of the phenomenon, ranging from a nuclear missile attack to meteors. “Law agencies and news media in San Diego were flooded with calls about 6 p.m. from people reporting everything from a flare to a comet to a nuclear bomb in the western sky,” reports the San Diego Union Tribune.

Just a day earlier, the FAA had issued flight restrictions for the Los Angeles International Airport, denying aircraft access to one of the most frequent approach paths for international and domestic travel.

The official explanation is a lie

The “official” explanation of this event — and remember that “official” explanations are almost always cover stories — is that the U.S. Navy launched a test missile just because they “routinely” test missiles.

“Media in California confirmed that the light came from an unarmed Trident missile fired from the USS Kentucky navy submarine,” reports the BBC. While they call the missile “unarmed,” they fail to mention that the Trident missile normally carries a thermonuclear warhead. There’s also no way for the media to know whether this missile was really unarmed or not, as the sole source on that question is the U.S. Navy itself.

Apparently the media thinks the public is so incredibly stupid that they’ll believe the U.S. Navy has nowhere else to launch a test missile other than right next to Los Angeles. Somehow we’re supposed to believe the entire Pacific Ocean won’t work for such a test launch, so they have to launch it adjacent to the airport and thereby inconvenience commercial aviation traffic for an entire week.

Obviously, the official cover story is pure bunk. So what’s the real story behind this? It all has to do with China and the covert war that’s already underway between China, the US and Russia.

China’s military submarines are a huge threat to U.S. national security

To get up to speed on what’s really happening, read this report from the Congressional Research Service (PDF) found at

Authored by Ronald O’Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs, and just released on Sep. 21, 2015, the report is entitled, “China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities.”

The report states:

China is building a modern and regionally powerful navy with a limited but growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime — the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War.

China’s naval modernization effort encompasses a broad array of platform and weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and supporting C4ISR (command and control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) systems.

The most important section of this report, in my assessment, is this description of China’s ship-killing ballistic missiles:

China is fielding an ASBM, referred to as the DF-21D, that is a theater-range ballistic missile equipped with a maneuverable reentry vehicle (MaRV) designed to hit moving ships at sea. DOD states that China continues to field an ASBM based on a variant of the CSS-5 (DF-21) MRBM that it began deploying in 2010. This missile provides the PLA the capability to attack aircraft carriers in the western Pacific. The CSS-5 Mod 5 has a range exceeding 1,500 km [about 810 nm] and is armed with a maneuverable warhead.

China, in other words, has weapons capable of destroying U.S. aircraft carriers, destroyers and other ships. The 1,500 km range is key because it allows a very wide operational range.

Just recently in August, the Chinese and Russians held their largest naval joint exercise in history as a way to “counter U.S. influence in Asia.” As reported by

The Russian and Chinese navies are set to hold their largest joint exercises ever, featuring scores of warships, hundreds of troops and an amphibious landing, in what appears to be a deepening of ties meant to counter a rising U.S. military presence in Asia.

In September, Chinese warships were spotted operating near the coast of Alaska. This was reported across the mainstream media, including in the Wall Street Journal in an article entitled, “Five Chinese Navy Ships Are Operating in Bering Sea off Alaska.”

Fox News also covered the same story: “5 Chinese warships spotted off Alaska coast during President Obama’s visit.”

In response to that territorial provocation, the U.S. Navy sent the USS Lassen destroyer to within 12 nautical miles of China’s newly-constructed military bases in the Spratly Islands.

China’s communist government openly condemned the act as a provocation of war. From the Straits Times:

China claims most of the South China Sea and on Oct 9 its Foreign Ministry warned that Beijing would “never allow any country to violate China’s territorial waters and airspace in the Spratly Islands, in the name of protecting freedom of navigation and overflight.”

The U.S. Navy’s “showcasing” of the Trident missile near Los Angeles is a $31 million billboard that tells China, “Don’t f–k with us.”

Nobody in the mainstream media is report this; probably because, with a few exceptions, they are mostly clueless, brain-dead propagandists who know nothing about international geopolitics and the real state of conflict in our world. Also, they are ordered what to write by the U.S. government regime in exactly the same way China’s “journalists” are ordered what to write by the Chinese regime.

Right now, the United States and China are in an undeclared state of war. China stands ready to strike the USA with nuclear warheads or high altitude EMP weapons that would destroy the U.S. power grid and cause 90% casualties across the unprepared population. Legendary American journalist Ted Koppel has even written a book about this entitled Lights Out: A Cyberattack, A Nation Unprepared, Surviving the Aftermath.

China and Russia preparing massive first strike against America

Many people believe that China and Russia are working together to prepare for a massive first strike against the United States that would cripple its defenses and economy. Following that first strike, a land invasion would commence using Russian troops.

Supporting this theory, Russian submarines have been spotted near undersea internet cables in an obvious effort to document their whereabouts so that the cables can be instantly severed, unleashing a devastating blow to the U.S. economy, Wall Street and even military communications. “Russian submarines and spy ships are aggressively operating near the vital undersea cables that carry almost all global Internet communications, raising concerns among some American military and intelligence officials that the Russians might be planning to attack those lines in times of conflict,” ” In times of tension or conflict, the ultimate Russian hack on the United States could involve severing the fiber-optic cables at some of their hardest-to-access locations to halt the instant communications on which the West’s governments, economies and citizens have grown dependent.”

At the same time a new Russian “drone sub” has been created that can strike U.S. coastal cities and harbors with nuclear weapons. Writing on, Jon Dougherty states, “According to officials, the developmental unmanned underwater vehicle, or UUV, when it is deployed, will be outfitted with megaton-class nuclear warheads that can destroy key ports used by U.S. nuclear-armed and powered submarines like Kings Bay, Georgia, and Puget Sound in Washington state.”

The ultimate pre-emptive strike on America: EMP attack, cyber attack, currency wars and bandwidth blackouts

If you put the pieces of the puzzle together, what’s really shaping up here is a massive, multi-layered pre-emptive strike against America, an empire seen by the rest of the world as an insane bully that meddles with everything on the international stage. This first strike, combining the forces and expertise of both China and Russia, may consist of:

  • High-altitude EMP detonation over North America, destroying regional power grids.
    • A devastating currency war initiated by China announcing its own gold-backed currency while dumping U.S. Treasury debt on the open market.
    • A Russian-led severing of undersea fiber optic cables.
    • Russian-launched nuclear missiles targeting U.S. coastal cities.
    • China-led assault on U.S. Navy warships using anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs).
    • A cyber warfare attack on key U.S. infrastructure, including water delivery systems, nuclear power plants and the power grid.

As all this is going on, the Obama administration — has been firing all the top military commanders who know how to survive such an assault. Instead of America’s military focusing on how to win wars, troops are now subjected to sensitivity training and the politically correct push for female troops on the front lines.

This is not fiction. Even the U.S. White House is now openly preparing for a massive EMP attack launched by China.

Dave Hodges also reports in this article about World War III:

Congress has now heard testimony that the United States is not ready for World War III while Russia is chomping at the bit to “get it on”. Further Congress has learned that Obama has been once again been badly outmaneuvered by Putin, the master chess player… the Chinese and the Russians are going to kick America’s rear end in the upcoming war.

Very disturbingly, there is a growing awareness, among Congress, that the United States cannot win World War III. There was only discussion, in these congressional meetings, as to whether, or not, the U.S. could prevail in World War III, not win the conflict.

To stay up to speed on all these events and how you might survive them,  you should  pay attention to the following websites: ,,,,,,
Sources for this article include:…

After all is said and done… what matters is that the `Qy` of the leaders of the Pakistan Army  is ridiculously low,   ..and  if sufficiently harassed… such as by an Indian response to another `26/11 kind`  terrorist  attack …   they may utilize the Nuclear Arsenal which is already at their disposal… Some sort of chain reaction will be inevitable.

The Geo politics in many other countries is unstable and even chaotic and leaders of many nations have a substantially low `Qy` such as for example of `North Korea, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc etc… to name just a few. Some of these  are already in possession of Nuclear weapons while others are in the process of acquiring them.


Recall the atom bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and caused 130000 deaths instantly and several thousand other deaths due to radiation. But the present day bomb is about 2500 times more powerful than the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Only about 100 of these … if dropped as uniformly distributed across the planet…. are enough to obliterate the human race. And we have about one hundred thousand of these at our disposal and not all of them are in `Safe hands`.

Unless good sense prevails… There is extreme danger to humanity. A solid consensus for reversing reliance on nuclear weapons is required as a vital contribution to preventing their chance of going into potentially dangerous hands, and ultimately ending them as a threat to the world.



The Einstein Russell Manifesto of 1955 gives us some ideas on what can be that good sense, as does Joseph Rotblat`s ten point memo after he received the Noble Prize for Peace. Here are a few more for your consideration. Your own comments and suggestions are welcome and  may be  made available with your answers to the three questions.


  • Complete nuclear disarmament and dismantlement strictly in accordance with Joseph Rotblat`s ten point memo .
  • Armies of the World must be drastically reduced to about 50% of their current strength. About 25 % of the reduced strength should go towards the formation of a world force, another 25% should be utilized only for developemental works including disaster management whenever required. Only about 50 % of the reduced strength should be towards national security including maintenance of law and order. All armies must be under the control of Civilian leaderships.
  • The Republican party of the US of A should reorient its ideology and bring it in line with that of the Democrats. particularly The primary objectives should be :
  1. To reduce the role of the `Military Industrial Complex` in line with the requirements of para 2 above.
  2. To limit its interactions with the rest of the World towards positive measures only required to ensure peace, and not to supply arms and ammunitions to nations in conflict.
  3. To substantially reduce the disparity between the rich 1% of America and the remaining 99 %.
  • Civil wars in the world should end immediately, and secular liberal democracy to be installed in all countries which are in conflict internally. The World force should be utilized to make this happen. The world must come to the rescue of countries in Civil War such as Iraq and Syria. A common man in these countries who is living in constant fear will not be bothered much about patriotism, or about the sovereignty and territorial integrity of his country.
  • Secular liberal democracies to be installed in all countries where it is not already functioning.
  • Conflicts between nations must be resolved by talks and cultural exchanges.
  • Friendship between India and Pakistan must be strengthened and all impediments to peaceful coexistence, progress and development must be removed by  intelligent talks  and cultural exchanges.
  • World leaders must unite to save the world from self destruction. They should join the Pugwash conferences …in fact they should  play the leading role in the Pugwash movement. The Scientist Pugwashites should act as advisers only.
  • World wide conferences between Scientists and Philosophers … in particular religious philosophers, should  be held routinely towards achievement  of a comprehensive convergence of Science and Religion and of all Religions into one religion … all on the basis of the following guidelines:
  1. The established principles and the established truths of Science must not be violated.
  2. The essence of religion to be forever kept in mind …viz ..` `to find solace and peace of mind in prayer and/or meditation`.. `to live in peaceful co existence with all and to live and let live`.. ` To take care of the environment around us`.
  3. Teachings of the great religious leaders should be followed but there should be no requirement to believe in miracles such as the rising from the dead, or the walking on water etc.etc.
  4. Religous documents that suggest intolerance of other religions should be reformed.
  5. Religous documents that suggest gender inequality should be reformed.
  6. An individual should be free to choose his religion and that freedom should include freedom from religion.

The entire subject relating to convergence of science with religion  needs to be viewed in the context of the `Information theory`. People order their lives based on their beliefs which in turn are based on the information accessible to them which in turn is based on the past interactions of the rest of the world on them which has made them what they are. There is no doubt  that the presence of such `information` in the field that gives solace and peace of mind in prayer and in the knowledge of God`s presence ( in whatever form one can imagine) is very much helpful to mankind. But when it is a question of `talking science` and discussing the subject in the context of its correlation with the `information theory`, we must ask the question : Is resurrection a possibility ? and then why is it assumed that the answer provided to this question by a `naturalist` or a `scientist` will be different from that provided by a theologian, particularly in the light of the fact that the information – the data that constitutes the input to perform their analysis – available to all of them is the same in all respects , not to mention that all three of them are made up of the same atoms and molecules.

Indeed, we must follow the teachings of the great religious leaders of the past.. but there should be no reason to believe the `rising from the dead`, `the walking on water`, or `the carrying of a mountain on a finger`.

On the other hand, it is to be realized that  the presence of `Information` on religions of the world, including that on mythology and religious philosophy, which leads people to go to the churches, temples and masjids etc, or  to perform rituals that provide solemnity ( even romance) to occasions such as marriages, festivals etc,   has over the years given immense happiness, solace and peace of mind to the people of the world, and there is no reason to believe why they should not continue to do so. However it is also to be realized that the presence of certain `information` in the religious doctrines that permit intolerance and Jihad against other religions, is full of self-endangerment and destructive potentials,  has over the years caused religious extremism, conflicts and wars, and there is no reason to believe why these doctrines should not be reformed.

All in all, when we talk science, the nature of reality is just  `Information` …the information in the `Intelligent Field` or the `Infinite Mind`. We may call this `IF` or `IM` as our `God` which is just a matter of taste ..but this God is just a computer. No doubt it is intelligent… it gives us everlasting consciousness (everlasting in the sense that we are unconscious of our `unconscious tenures` so they pass quickly ), it designs our bodies and their capacities to grow, and above all it designs the laws of the universe with precisely calculated mathematical constants… etc, but this intelligence in the field is limited to the sum total of information acquired and processed through time. The quantum of intelligence is of course powerful enough to sustain the universe, which is impressive  of course, but whether we can call  it `divine` is a matter of taste. We must take into consideration the fact that many times life can only live at the expense of other life…That most living creatures kill each other in everlasting strife.

But of course …the time spent `living` is always several million times longer than the time spent `dying`.

And no harm will be done if we call it `divine` as the `information` stored in our minds tells us that we are forever conscious …

There was never a time when we could ask the question: `Where is the universe?`

In conclusion I give below a Paul Davies quote;

“Whatever their difference of opinion about the nature of God, I know of no religion that does not teach that God is a mind“…( from `God and the new physics` …Paul Davies)

This fits very well with the `Intelligent field`, or the `Infinite mind`, and the `Six Words`

  • Once … all the steps from 1 to 7 above are taken… and all the countries are secular, liberal and democratic and religions have converged … there will be no role for terrorists…. and terrorism may be considered as non existent…and any remnant terror kind of activity may simply be considered as a law and order problem.
  • Worldwide rise in population must be controlled. A U turn must take place before it reaches the 8 billion mark and the world population should stabilize at about 6 billion.

These are just a few steps that need to be taken… your suggestions on additional steps … are welcome.


What lies ahead if good sense does not prevail? :

This is not an easy question to answer… how can we predict the future with so many uncertainties. with such a high randomness coefficient as prevailing now…?

If we go to Google in search for an answer… you`ll find hundreds of articles on the subject… Many predicting disastrous wars… some even predicting end of human civilization… while there are some .. rather a few in number.. who think otherwise, they are of the opinion that with such a large amount of nuclear Arsenal available on the planet, no country will ever take the risk of going to war, and there will never ever be a nuclear war…. wishful thinking of course.


Having placed before you all the cards on the table…. all the `Information in the Field`… I now ask you dear reader to answer three simple questions according to your own experience, knowledge and best judgement. For each question there are ten possible answers . Select one among these as the most likely according to you.

QUESTION 1 : If  adequate good sense is not forthcoming,  what according to you is the probable chance of a nuclear attack taking place during one calendar year ?

Tick one of the following;

  1. No chance at all
  2. About 1 in 10000
  3. About 1 in 1000
  4. About 1 in 500
  5. About 1 in 200
  6. About 1 in 100
  7. About 1 in 50
  8. About 1 in 20
  9. About 1 in 10
  10. Greater than 1 in 5

Q2 : For each nuclear attack, what are the chances that there will be a global chain reaction leading to the collapse  of human civilization?

Tick one of the following:

  1. Less than 1 in 20
  2. About 1 in 20
  3. About 1 in 15
  4. About 1 in 10
  5. About 1 in 8
  6. About 1 in 6
  7. About 1 in 4
  8. About 1 in 3
  9. About 1 in 2
  10. Greater than 1 in 2.

Q3 : What are the chances that Good sense will prevail and there will be no nuclear war in the next 500 years ?

Tick one of the following:

  1. No chance at all
  2. About 1 in 1000
  3. About 1 in 500
  4. About 1 in 100
  5. About 1 in 50
  6. About 1 in 20
  7. About 1 in 10
  8. About 1 in 5
  9. About 1 in 2
  10. More than 75 percent

Looking forward to reader`s responses.


….                                ….                                 ….                            ….                            ….



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>