No, the United States did not announce to Japan: “Attention, Japan: We, the people of the United States, have developed nuclear weapons. . . .” Nor did the United States invite representatives of Japan to witness the test of an atom bomb. Possibly, that would not have been enough for Japan to surrender unconditionally. But two nuclear bombs dropped on Japan were enough.

The nano superweapons will be able in particular to destroy the U.S. means of (nuclear) retaliation, on which Mutual Assured Destruction and hence world peace have depended. In the chapter “Engines of Destruction” of his famous seminal book of 1986, Drexler, the founder of nanotechnology, wrote (p. 174):

A nuclear bomb can only blast things [such as cities], but nanomachines and AI [Artificial Intelligence] systems could be used to infiltrate, seize, change, and govern a territory or a world.

Thus, swarms of billions of supermicroscopic self-replicating molecular nanomachines can find and destroy enemy means of nuclear retaliation, such as submarines submerged deep in the ocean with nuclear missiles aboard—something that nuclear weapons cannot do, and hence in the absence of molecular nano weapons, such submarines can surface and retaliate with their nuclear missiles to destroy the attacking nuclear country. Now, post-nuclear superweapons can circumvent Mutual Assured Destruction.

A nuclear bomb has been envisioned as just a very powerful conventional bomb. Actually, its principle of operation had nothing to do with conventional explosives. Even today few can describe how it works. Einstein’s letter to Roosevelt of Aug. 2, 1939, was not a doctoral thesis on nuclear physics. First, Roosevelt would not have understood it. Second, it would not have made the new weapon more probable. In his letter, Einstein mentioned Fermi, Szillard, and Joliot Curie as authorities (along with Einstein himself!). Still, it is only late in 1942 that the Manhattan Project was in full swing. But if Einstein had given every day five lectures to Roosevelt on how the nuclear weapons worked, the project would not have moved more quickly. What advanced it was Hitler’s lightning-speed seizure of France in 1940 and his declaration of war on the United States in 1941.

To listen to my reader David, the key problem for the dictators of China is to convince the United States that China has developed post-nuclear superweapons and to make the United States surrender. No, the key problem of the dictators of China is to develop post-nuclear superweapons capable of annihilating the West (see the quotation above from the founder of nanotechnology Drexler about nano superweapons). As to whether the United States will surrender unconditionally or will let themselves be annihilated, this will be a problem for the United States, not for the dictators of China.

On the same day, Dec. 2, I received another e-mail, worth quoting:

Your articles are impressive and frightening. Given our government’s ability to keep some secrets, you see nevertheless no reason whatsoever to believe that somewhere within the US Government, there exists a program to develop these types of weapons or at least counter-measures for nano-weapons? Am I wrong in believing that your conclusion about the US Government’s lack of initiative in this area (nanoweapons) lies in the fact that they (the US Government) has not approached Mr.Drexler directly or publicly? Keep up the good work, Semper Fidelis, Aaron Kiger

Drexler is known all over the world, and is especially respected in China, as a man of genius—the founder of nanotechnology. In 1986, when his seminal book was published, he also co-founded the Foresight Institute, perhaps the greatest assembly of nanotechnologists in the United States, if not in the West. Now, the Senate has refused to allocate a cent to Drexler and his Institute because he has recognized the possibility of application of molecular nanotechnology to the development of post-nuclear nano superweapons! On the other hand, those nano-technologists who rely on commercial, that is, purely civilian applications of nanotechnology, have been generously endowed by the U.S. Congress, and predictably, some of them have proclaimed that Drexler’s study of military applications of nanotechnology is so much nonsense, good only for scaring little children, as one “peaceful” nanotechnologist put it.

Indeed, what are these military applications of nanotechnology for? The United States could have annihilated Iraq with conventional nuclear weapons long ago. But it never did—possibly not to annihilate along with Iraq its oil worth trillions of dollars. Who needs post-nuclear superweapons?

Against this background, to imagine that secret unknown nanotechnologists have been secretly financed by the U.S. government/Congress to develop nano superweapons, is the same as to imagine that Roosevelt spurned Einstein, Fermi, Szilard, et al., because they allowed for the military applications of nuclear power, and financed some unknown nuclear scientists to develop nuclear weapons. The question would have been: who had discovered and promoted those unknowns? Roosevelt?

Similarly, the question is: who has discovered and promoted those alleged secret unknown nanotechnologists to develop post-nuclear superweapons? Members of the U.S. Congress who had not known before 2000 the word “nanotechnology” (coined or made widely used by Drexler in 1986)?

Finally, I received on the next day, Dec. 4, the following one-sentence mail from Cory Bone, Wilson,

OK: There must be something we can do now to eliminate this [China] threat.

Yes, we (that is, the U.S. government and U.S. Congress) can launch the development of post-nuclear superweapons, a new Manhattan Project, and if we develop them ahead of the dictators of China, they will know that if they attack us, they will be counterattacked in kind. Mutual Assured Destruction—with post-nuclear superweapons!

What is necessary for this? To wake up the majority of the American people to the danger of annihilation of the United States or even of the West as a whole by post-nuclear superweapons of the dictators of China, now in alliance with Putin’s Russia.

NewsMax.com and WorldTribune.com are doing their bit in this most important aspect of enlightenment. No wonder. Those in charge of them were in charge of the New York City Tribune, the only newspaper that wrote about Soviet Russia’s development of post-nuclear superweapons, which the newly elected Russian president Yeltsin confirmed in 1992 by opening to international inspection the giant biosection of the nationwide archipelago, developing post-nuclear superweapons.

So what’s the trouble? The trouble is that in contrast to the three major TV networks, NewsMax.com and WorldTribune.com do not have access to the majority of the American people.

With two dozen distinguished Westerners, such as the late Saul Bellow, I co-founded in 1978 the nonprofit Center for the Survival of Western Democracies, Inc. Today its task is to help NewsMax.com and WorldTribune.com to gain access to the majority of the American people, who will compel the U.S. government and the U.S. Congress to launch the development of post-nuclear superweapons as a deterrent to those the Chinese dictators have been developing since 1986.

This is a race, and the earlier the West, or at least the United States, joins it, the greater are the chances that the dictators of China will not develop the fatal superweapons ahead of the United States. The latter was mortally endangered before: recall the development of nuclear weapons in Nazi Germany, which seemed in 1942 ahead of the United States. As an American said on such an occasion: “The truth is ugly—we must face it with courage and prayer.”

Lev Navrozov's (navlev@cloud9.net] new book is available on-line at www.levnavrozov.com. To request an outline of the book, send an e-mail to webmaster@levnavrozov.com.