U.S. is shutting down 1/3 of total nuclear weapons. We are promising to not use nuclear weapons against those without them and against those that have no probable cause for becoming a threat. North Korea is the same reason here. We have no refutable proof that they are a threat to us, so under this doctrine, we are leaving them alone, "nuclear-ly".
Thanks Frank, I can always count you to give factual data.
Seriously though, when the time comes, I doubt anyone will remember this policy, for, all fingers will be on the button if attacked by a 'threat' with substantial damage to country. [U.S.]
Please, as long as The USA still uses the constitution, as it was written, and congress behaves itself and
leaves doors open to all congress, letting every representative inside before locking the doors! As long as congress doesn't allow the president to grow his branch of government so that it's bigger than the other two branches and our allies continue to be our allies and as long as the military stays physically and financially strong, this planet will continue to survive.
For gods sake, people need to stop homogenising entire ethnic groups for the sake of ease. It's just not how the world works.
Thanks, Woody, you're preaching to the choir!
Personally im against the policy. The entire point of nuclear arms is deterrent. Without them, we could very easily revert to massive and infinitely more destructive conventional wars which plagued the 20th century. A world without nukes is simply a utopian publicity stunt from a president who wants to be seen to be doing something. Don't get me wrong, im a fan of Obama in general, but this is just weak.
I'm not a fan of Obama but because of what he said in his Inaugural Speech, saying how he was going to "fundamentally change America", made me become a better listener.
I actually started rereading the Constitution, The Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers, books on Lincoln, Henry Clay, the American Civil War, States' Rights, etc.
Now this nuclear weapon reduction is a good thing because it's probably just a fancy, political way to upgrade our cache and dump the oldest weapons that may be leaking?
So you're telling me that a world where no country had access to nuclear arms, is a bad world and will somehow create more violence?
The only thing "weak" here is your argument that weapons of mass destruction is nothing but a deterrent. When/if we fight a war with Iran, it will be because of Nuclear Weapons dispute, not because we had nuclear weapons as a deterrent to prevent violence.
Our Nuclear Weapons obviously didn't stop the Radical Islamists from attacking us at 9/11, and the only use countries have for them now is to establish themselves as a big military force in the world. The more countries that get them, the more that will want them, and the more we will want countries not to have them.
If you ask me, the better deterrent to violence would be the elimination of nuclear weapons, not more of them.
Bush waited forever for the UN to get off the (seats of their pants), before declaring war with Saddam Hussein. Who, if I may remind everyone was talking loudly and threatening the US with WMD's. Two years later, Bush finally got the green light after the UN Peacekeeper's who first started looking for the weapons got kicked out by Husein and his goons.
In fact, since the UN building is close to being condemned I wish they would pack up and leave! What the **** good are they? Once upon a very long, cold war ago, it was needed. I say good bye, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
The reasons for war in iran are much more to do with western hypocrisy and decades of imperialist meddling than with the recent development of nukes. Either way the ayatollahs are more concerned with staying in power than committing suicide by actually following up any posturing.
Are we going all the way back to the
Shah of Iran who was ousted during the President Jimmy Carter days? We really should because that's when terrorists started popping up every where, those good old 1970's. Let's see, there was
Idi Amin, the cannibal that held the Israeli flight in Uganda For 3 days? Wow, I was a kid but this was a tense moment in history. Then you had Muammar al-Gaddafi in Libya, acting cool for the camera but his government was repeatedly linked with terrorist activity, the the '70-'80's. Look at
him now!The point I'm trying to make is, and I'll try to debate your statement too: Woody's saying that the Ayatollah's would rather live than become a crater. I say the
Ayatollah currently in Iran is praised and adored only for the camera any more and I think even that has stopped. Last summer there was about a half a million people
rioting and trying to tell the world how corrupt the Iranian government was. Terrorist's love it when America is so wrapped up in it's own business, the economy was
tanking last summer, soldiers were losing there homes due to corrupt mortgage lenders,(Acorn). What a mess! Mean wile the
Ayatollah makes "
uppets" out of the government leaders, causing more grief and despair in Iran so that Iranian's are naturally disgusted when they feel their votes have no value. I'll never forget Mr. Ahmadinejad's
Columbian University Visit, Sept '07. I wasn't there in person but I was in Spirit and those kids made all American's proud.
What? Lol. I said that your argument is weak, I didn't say that weapons of mass destruction is nothing but a deterrent.
The second sentence, top of page 3, ..."The only thing "weak" here is your argument that weapons of mass destruction (WMD's) is nothing but a deterrent."
When did I say that I think every single nuclear armed country would someday disarm all of their nuclear weapons at the same time?
However the United States has recently made some great strides with Russia to decrease our Nuclear weapon arsenal, and I do believe that elimination of Nuclear arms is possible if, and only if leading countries such as China, the USA and Russia start the strides towards a world without nuclear weapons. Eventually others would follow suit.
Well, I'm not sure but you did do it again. Not to sound sarcastic but reread the last paragraph starting with..."and I do believe that elimination of nuclear arms is possible if, and only if leading countries such as China, USA and Russia start the strides towards a
world without nuclear weapons.
I know you mean in the future.
