Posted on 04/05/2009 5:53:32 AM PDT by maggief
PRAGUE – President Barack Obama on Sunday launched an effort to rid the world of nuclear weapons, calling them "the most dangerous legacy of the Cold War" and saying the U.S. has a moral responsibility to lead as the only nation to ever use one.
In a speech driven with fresh urgency by North Korea's rocket launch just hours earlier, Obama said the U.S. would "immediately and aggressively" seek ratification of a comprehensive ban on testing nuclear weapons. He said the U.S. would host a summit within the next year on reducing and eventually eliminating nuclear weapons, and he called for a global effort to secure nuclear material.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
There are smaller nations that depend on our presence for their own security.
The reality is that right now the only hope this country has is if a Dem steps off the reservation. A Dem with power. A Dem who does not have his head up Obama’s ass (or Pelosi’s or Michelle's)
Amen! My thought exactly. I woke up with this idiot blathering, and my thought was “Whatcha gonna do, “Uh”bama, if a rogue leader insists upon following the WMD path, and his buds in the UN refuse to stop him? Invade with just a few friends, or even unilaterally????? Sound familiar?”
All around the globe, grins are appearing on faces that haven't cracked a smile in years.
It would certainly make America the patsy.
I'm trying to figure out exactly what his game is here. Obviously, we could unilaterally disarm under the ruse of an "agreement" but what happens when it inevitably surfaces that our adversaries are not complying? We then learn to live under conditions of nuclear blackmail. Nice work Obongo.
FUBO
Well, Peking not so much. But Moscow for a certainty. Nukes were essential to keeping the peace in Europe and assuring its survival against the Red Army.
In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
In the world of no nukes....
In a conventional war without nuclear weapons or ICBMs, all three of these powers would be unconquerable. We wouldn't be able to invade and conquer either USSR or China, but then they wouldn't be able to invade and conquer USA.
Due to its massive population, we wouldn't be able to conquer China without using methods utterly unacceptable to the American public. We would probably have had to kill at least a hundred million people, and Americans wouldn't have stood for it.
The geographical size and conventional military power of the USSR also made it invulnerable to conquest.
OTOH, neither China nor Russia would have been able to even get at North America. They could have conquered Eurasia and possibly Africa between them, but they never came close to having the water transport capacity or naval power to launch a successful invasion of North America. Our conventional navy always outclassed theirs by a ridiculous degree.
What nuclear weapons and the fear of their use really did is protect Europe from conquest by USSR. They have prevented WWIV for well over 60 years. That's a pretty good thing.
Also, one may argue with some credibility that the world would be a better place had nukes not been invented. But since everyone knows they are possible, and roughly how to make them, I fail to see how destroying existing stocks would make us any safer. In the gun-free (or nuke-free) zone, the guy who breaks the rule is King.
Nahh. Give me a reasonable method by which China could launch a successful cross-Pacific invasion of North America.
Our inability to invade and conquer them does not imply their ability to invade and conquer us.
So the idiot wants to start with us becoming nuclear free — what a lamebrain idiot or shall I say we now have our Manchurian Candidate Muslim.
Gee, a “Test Ban Treaty!” Only someone with the Godlike qualities of our Messiah could have thought of something like that, huh? No wonder it’s never been considered before!!
“he called for a global effort to secure nuclear material.”
First we’ll invite international inspectors to monitor our sites. Syrians, Egyptians, Indonesions, Nigerians, Venezuelans...etc etc
then everyone else can follow our example ...
s-a-r-c
“”-The 56th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Chantilly, Virginia, USA 5 – 8 June 2008. The Conference will deal mainly with a nuclear free world, cyber terrorism, Africa, Russia, finance, protectionism, US-EU relations, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Islam and Iran.””
0bama is just carrying the water for the people who got him where he is today. No biggie.
Nothing, absolutely NOTHING is going to put it back in the bottle. There is NO international treaty or regime, minus a world-wide tyranny (which WILL keep the right to such arms for itself) that will prevent tyrants and would-be tyrants from building such arms, when they really want to. (How many years of ‘gun control’ laws have we had and how much easier is it for a criminal to get a gun than it is for citizen to get one legally??).
Thus, the moral nations who would abhor using such weapons, and have used them but once, and only as a last resort, MUST be prepared, with such weapons on hand AS A DETERRENT TO THE TYRANTS. Nuclear weapons are no more the problem in geo-political violence than are handguns in civil violence. Who has them and who would use them first is always the problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.