Written by Dr. Roger Kotila   

The new F-35 joint strike fighter aircraft is symbolic of what's fatally wrong with the Pentagon's long-standing war policy of mutual assured destruction (MAD). The F-35 may one day carry nuclear missiles. With 18.6 million lines of software code required for the F-35 to "function at its operational specifications" (Boardman, RSN, 9-22-13), one can only sigh in disbelief.

It is just another reason why it is time to end a nuclear military policy defended by the dinosaurs at the Pentagon and richly funded by Congress. A totally new nonmilitary security doctrine is desperately needed. It has appeared in the form of the Earth Constitution, and that is why I became a world federalist.

As the world gets increasingly technical, the chances for something to go terribly wrong are virtually inevitable, a conclusion clearly explained in Eric Schlosser's "Command and Control," an in-depth investigation of nuclear weapons (Penguin Press, 2013). Technical failure or human error is inescapable.

Defense pundits have defended MAD because, so far, nuclear war has been avoided. Unfortunately, the theory is based upon the rational notion that no one would attack the United States because we could totally destroy them in retaliation. It makes perfect sense, and it works...except when it doesn't.

It is tempting to believe that MAD isn't mad. Unfortunately, psychologically, the policy gives a false sense of security. MAD requires excessive nuclear weaponry which in turn increases the overall risk that, sooner or later, something will go horribly wrong.

MAD versus the 'David' factor:

MAD fails to take into account a determined foe -- best illustrated in the Biblical legend of David and Goliath. Despite the fact that Goliath was an overwhelmingly powerful foe, it did not deter David.

At the operational level MAD consists of the "nuclear triad" -- nuclear warheads that can be delivered from the air, under the sea, or from land. But what about the 'David' factor?

The Defense Department, some years after Hiroshima, developed "man portable" atomic bombs. Adam Rawnsley and David Brown ("The Littlest Boy", Foreign Policy, Jan./Feb. 2014) describe the original miniature nuke -- the B-54 Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM). It weighed 58 pounds and could be carried on the back of a soldier.

These miniaturized atomic bombs gave way to Edward Teller's thermonuclear hydrogen bombs -- vastly more powerful than the original atomic bomb, yet some as small as 3 feet in length -- small enough to fit in a large suitcase.

The possibility of "suitcase" nukes coupled with the 'David' factor render the Pentagon's doctrine of massive retaliation hopelessly useless, and irresponsibly dangerous to the world. Such miniaturized nukes in the hands of state directed terrorists (false flag operations), or non-state terrorists, could potentially be secretly placed in major cities.

Such a scenario renders the vastly expensive missile defense systems irrelevant. Moreover, the nation of the vaporized city would not know who to retaliate against, making MAD useless.

First strike and launch-on-warning are Pentagon/NATO policies that further endanger the world.

Seeking military advantage, or fearing an impending attack by an adversary, first strike has become part of Pentagon and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) policy. Put differently, strategists have adopted the right to launch a surprise nuclear attack.

Additionally, decision time is foolishly short. Many of our missiles are on "hair trigger" alert (i.e., launch-on- warning).

"In a nuclear crisis, the U.S. secret war plan calls for the president to decide in just 13 minutes what he should do in the event there is a serious warning of a missile attack," reports Pulitzer Prize recipient David Hoffman (Foreign Policy, Feb., 2013). Thirteen minutes to decide to destroy the world? What could possibly go wrong?

What is wrong with this picture? There are many examples:

"Flag officers in unified combatant commands,... are now given authority by the US president to have operational control over nuclear weapons to launch attacks on their own prerogatives." (Nazemroaya, "The Globalization of NATO", 2012)

Former nuclear commanders talk of handing over bombs to NATO units from other nations which, in retrospect, "you wouldn't trust with a .22 rifle." (Eric Schlosser, Command and Control, 2013)

"...an Air Force general in charge of nuclear-tipped missiles relieved for drunkenness off duty -- follows a long list of officer wrong-doings over the last year." (San Francisco Chronicle, 10-24-13)

"In just one example, in August, 2007, six nuclear warheads disappeared for two days between North Dakota's Minot and Louisiana's Barksdale Air Force bases." (San Francisco Chronicle, 12-11-11)

"Twice this year alone, Air Force officers entrusted with the launch keys to nuclear-tipped missiles have been caught leaving open a blast door that is intended to help prevent a terrorist or other intruder from entering their underground command post..." (Associated Press, 10-23-13)

A world free of nuclear danger...or, Why I became a world federalist:

The world federalist solution provides the means for security without nuclear weapons. By contrast, the United Nations system has been handicapped by its Charter, hence unable to eliminate nuclear weapons, or end war.

Einstein and other high level thinkers concluded many years ago that the world federalist solution is the (only) path to eliminate nuclear weapons. The world does not have to continue to live in the cold shadow of a nuclear nightmare. We know what to do.

Pentagon policy and doctrine must be challenged and reversed. The answer lies in going under the protection of a world federalist designed world constitution. That document is the Earth Constitution.

A democratic world federal constitution gives nations a nonmilitary means to resolve conflicts. Differences between nations are resolved nonviolently -- by means of courts and enforceable world law, and a democratically elected world parliament.

The Earth Constitution, drafted by world federalists and world citizens worldwide, is ready for ratification by the peoples of the world, and by the nations.

Article by Roger Kotila, Ph.D. Earth Federation News & Views earthfederation.info