“A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. And no matter how great the obstacles may seem, we must never stop our efforts to reduce the weapons of war. We must never stop at all until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of this Earth.” - Ronald Reagan, 1984, in China. (h/t: Andrew Sullivan)
Seriously. Conservatives need to stop the hysteria every time President Obama speaks or takes action in a different way than George W. Bush. Calm the fuck down.
Seriously. Conservatives need to stop the hysteria every time President Obama speaks or takes action in a different way than George W. Bush. Calm the fuck down.
4 comments:
Reagan was right regarding the reduction of nuclear weapons of all parties. "Trust but verify".
That being said, you do NOT tell your potential enemies what you will or will not do to defend your nation.
Fear of reprisal is what kept us from having a nuclear war during the cold war.
Telling enemies that they can attack us with WMD's such as biological or chemical weapons and we will not respond with nukes is ludicrous in the extreme.
It makes us look considerably weaker and more vulnerable.
Obama's oratory will not convince the world to not attack us, no matter how messianic he thinks he is.
This man is foolish in the extreme and is making the world and the United States considerably more open for a war he is supposedly trying to avoid.
I will say to you what the right is fond of saying all the time: read the bill (in this case treaty)! You seem to have let Rush and Sean do your reading for you. If you had actually read it, you would realize that your rabid, anti-Obama "we're so weak, we're all gonna die" rhetoric is even more silly now than it usually is.
And sorry, but I have already had my lifetime limit of right-wingers lecturing about the proper response to WMD. Do you mean actual WMD, or the imaginary kind like there was in Iraq? Oh, wait, we'll still find them, I guess we haven't looked long enough...
Just what is it in this asinine treaty that I have mischaracterized, Splash?
Further, the WMD's that WERE in Iraq are far more a reality than say economic sense, foreign policy sense, and common sense in general that is apparently absent in both the legislative and executive branches of our government. Those three traits seem to be far more ethearal than WMD's that Saddam did indeed possess once.
The Cold War is over - I'm sure you heard. There is absolutely zero reason to have the exact same nuclear posture as we did then. The paradigm has shifted. Terrorists don't represent nations, and the real threat regarding nukes is terrorists using them. This shift finally addresses the longstanding need to both reduce our nuclear stockpiles and to change the circumstances when they would be used.
Frankly, the same people criticizing Obama's new directive are the same "experts" that said Iraq had WMD, Bin laden and Hussein were collaborators on 9/11, argued for fewer troops for the invasion of Iraq, and said a post-war plan was not necessary. I take it as a sign that Obama is correct when those same fools are attempting to discredit his ideas.
Post a Comment