If Nuclear Weapons Aren't Real, How do We Explain Iran?

On Akio Nakatani's Book Titled 'Death Object' and Its Implications

In 2017, an author by the Japanese name of Akio Nakatani published a work (“Death Object”) claiming that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fire-bombed with conventional napalm, in order to burn the largely wooden cities to the ground. He contests that atom bombs are real and provides a compelling argument. But if atom bombs aren’t real, then how do we explain the situation in Iran?

Personally, I stand with Akio Nakatani's thesis from hist Death Object that atom bombs aren't real. Notably because he quotes several American generals saying they also didn’t believe in the reality of splicing Einstein’s atoms. Although I do believe nuclear radiation exists, and that radiation bombs could make places uninhabitable, such as the region around Chernobyl, Russia, I don’t believe atoms can be spliced or exploded in nuclear chain reactions.

The way we fire nuclear power plants, however, is by heating water from the radiation emitted by decaying uranium or plutonium. Nuclear power plants are effectively nuclear steam engines. The steam is what powers gears that generate electricity.

Still, if this is so, then why would Israel and the USA care to destroy Iran's alleged nuclear program? If atom bombs aren’t real, then why would Israel care to destroy Iran for it? Well, what if Israel military destruction isn’t the real issue here. What if Israel and the USA are trying to prevent Iran from having civilian energy? What if the key point were to deny Iran a modern industry?

Iran is a major gas and oil exporter. If Iran were to switch to nuclear energy to fuel its own industry, it could then export more oil and gas to China. That would radically enrich the Iranian economy. Iran could become a modern nation within several years, no more than a decade. And that is what Israelis and Americans are truly worried about. A rival modern nation in the Middle East could not only upset the Israeli economy, it could also upset the global power balance away from the West toward the East.

As I’ve explained many times before, Israel is really a trade hub for energy and goods flowing from East to West. Israel is to be regarded an American or British outpost in the vicinity of important global trade routes: the Persian Gulf, the Suez Canal, the Mediterranean, the Strait of Hormuz, the Red Sea, and so on. Israel effectively exists to secure global trade to the benefit of the Anglo-American Empire.

If Iran were to modernize itself using nuclear energy, it could quickly become a rivaling economy to Israel, thus taking charge of the region and its trade route connections. It could also build up the Iranian military and invade either Israel or the entire region (Qatar, Jordan, Syria, etc.). Then, Iran would become the local hegemony at the expense of Israel and the West.

So if atom bombs aren’t real, then the conflict with Iran must be about energy market manipulation meant to keep Iran relatively poor and incompetent. The story of “nuclear bombs able to hit Washington, D.C.” are a simple fairy tale meant to fool Western consumers.

The American-led West doesn't want Iran to become a developed nation with modern nuclear energy. It's for the same reason that Americans don't want Germany to have nuclear power plants! Not because of an atom bomb threat, but because of economic competition.

The USA and Israel are like corporations working hard to take out the competition. The declining global economies force them to do so.

Now, assuming the story I told you is indeed true, I favor nuclear power plants for German, so that Europe can reboot its economies and, perhaps, outcompete the USA. That way, soon, Palestine and Israel could become Christian again.