When will molecular nanoweapons in China be ready for war? To answer this question, it is useful to recall the interval between the hypothesis of the atomic bomb at the beginning of the nuclear research and its realization in 1945 as weapons ready for war.
Marie Curie and her husband, Joliot, received the Nobel Prize in 1903, when Marie was 36. A Russian poet, her contemporary, wrote: “By an atomic bomb was exploded the world in Curie’s lab.”
But the atomic bomb would not have appeared even in 1945 had not Albert Einstein decided to emigrate from Germany after he had understood (when listening to the news from Germany while on a visit to the United States), that anti-Semitism in Germany would not be stopped with Adolf Hitler in power (as the New York Times assured its readers), but on the contrary might become catastrophic for Jews.
Besides, when Hitler tried to defeat Britain, the United States helped Britain, and Hitler declared war on the United States, which enabled Roosevelt to make his own presidential decision to launch an atomic project. Since Hitler was bogged down in Stalin’s Russia, the United States became the first country to develop atomic bombs. Two of them were dropped in 1945 on Japan, which had attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor, whereupon Japan surrendered unconditionally, since its nuclear bombs were not ready for war.
This atomic war was the only modern war of the 20th century. The next modern war may be China’s attack on the United States with post-nuclear weapons, such as molecular nanoweapons, which Eric Drexler described in his 1986 book.
If 42 years were to pass between Marie Curie’s Nobel Prize and the real atom bombs, how many years will have to pass between Drexler’s book and China’s attack on the United States with molecular nanoweapons?
Meanwhile, China is taking over Africa, which occupies more than one-fifth of the total land of the globe, and with its billion people accounts for 14.8 percent of the world’s population.
What would have happened if the People’s Liberation Army of China had simply occupied Africa? Then most Africans would have joined a guerrilla war against China, and some Western countries would have helped them with weapons. More important, the dictatorship of China would have lost its mask of a country developing its military might for the sake of progress.
So China is “taking over” Africa without an open all-out war. Before World War II, Africa consisted mostly of colonies, but the colonial rule began to disappear. For the democracies, the colonial rule became disgraceful and difficult. And this is how China came in. Her 750,000 state slaves, who have come to Africa in the past decade as private persons, can well enslave Africans without an open general war.
On May 1, thisisLondon.co.uk reprinted from the Evening Standard an article entitled “How China Is Taking Over Africa, And Why the West Should Be VERY Worried.” The article (page 3 of 6 on Yahoo! May 1) says:
Chinese-made war planes roar through the African sky, bombing opponents, Chinese-made assault weapons and grenades are being used to fuel countless murderous civil wars, often over the materials the Chinese are desperate to buy.
Who is waging this war? Oh, no, not any official Chinese military or civilian forces! It is simply that, in the past 10 years, 750,000 “private” Chinese have come privately to Africa. Can’t a Chinese travel where he or she chooses? Are you against the freedom of traveling or what?
Robert Mugabe, 84, is an African who says that “the only good white man [that is, neither an African, nor a Chinese] is a dead white man.”
In contrast to Hitler, who secretly ordered the industrial extermination of Jews after his defeat near Moscow at the end of 1941 to prevent himself from being betrayed by his subordinates to the Anglo-Saxons, Mugabe is for a slow bit-by-bit annihilation of whites.
He calls himself the president of Zimbabwe because he plays at democracy in Zimbabwe and hence he, who owns Zimbabwe as his slave state, must be called the president of this (democratic!) African country, whose whites are good whites if they are dead.
In June 2008, Human Rights Watch, a New York-based monitoring group, released a 69-page report that documented the efforts to suppress all resistance to the election of President Mugabe the preceding March.
Documented results are 36 deaths, 2,000 victims of abuse and torture, and 3,000 displaced Zimbabweans.
Author Christopher Booker writes: “It may not be surprising that, as befits any mad dictator, President Mugabe is now the proud owner of a palatial $4.5 million mansion in Harare and a similarly lavish country hide-away, each fitted with the latest electronic security systems, including anti-aircraft missiles.”
Mugabe resembles Stalin in his use of the word democracy to describe his slave ownership and his passion to achieve a 100 percent vote for himself. Of course, Stalin was more effective: All of us had to vote, for those in charge of the voting had the lists of all voters in their area and their addresses, and would visit him or her if he or she had not yet come to vote, to remind him or her that the voting was a noble duty.
Well, Mugabe is still far from Stalin’s electoral perfection. But does he act even today on his own? No! On Dec. 25, 2008, a Telegraph.co.uk report was entitled “Why Has China Bought Mugabe a Mansion?”
Well, if no one could forbid 750,000 Chinese to come to Africa as private individuals in the past decade, surely no one can forbid them to build mansions for Africans like Mugabe or give money to them. You wouldn’t want to abolish human rights, would you?
That is, the dictatorship of China is taking over Africa without any open general war — but just via “private people” who have come to Africa for their private purposes and happened to be Chinese (that is, not whites, in Mugabe’s worldview).
You can e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.