Overstatement?
Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.
Those options include:
• Reconfiguring the US nuclear force to allow for an arsenal measured in hundreds rather than thousands of deployed strategic warheads.
• Redrafting nuclear doctrine to narrow the range of conditions under which the US would use nuclear weapons.
• Exploring ways of guaranteeing the future reliability of nuclear weapons without testing or producing a new generation of warheads.
If you think Obama's move is kinda neat, fuzzy, and all rainbows and balloons, measure it by THIS response:
According to a final draft of the resolution due to be passed on Thursday, however, the UN security council will not wholeheartedly embrace the US and Britain's call for eventual abolition of nuclear weapons. Largely on French insistence, the council will endorse the vaguer aim of seeking "to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons".
When the Cheese-Eating Frogs think Obama's over the line.........
HT: Ace
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
overstatement.
We all ready have enough nuclear weapons to churn the entire world many times over.
This is a fine example of rad right economics. Scrimp on things we really need like health care and pissing out money through a fire hose when it comes to the military.
krshorewood is a fine example of rad left thinking. National defense has always been the federal government's responsibility. Universal health care is historically not, and ought not to be.
Come on man. We're all for defense, but we are talking about is in incredible waste of money for the reason stated.
I like spending money out of progress, not fear. Isn't that what a faith in God is for?
"In God we trust. All others pay cash."
Post a Comment