Down the memory hole again.
July 2008 (CNN)
“It’s time to send a clear message to the world: America seeks a world with no nuclear weapons,” the White House hopeful said.
Today (NYT):
The treaty would require each side to reduce deployed strategic nuclear warheads to roughly 1,600, down from 2,200 now, officials have said. It would also oblige each side to reduce its arsenal of strategic bombers and land- and sea-based missiles to 800, half the old limit of 1,600.
Arms control advocates consider those reductions to be relatively modest.
Nice work, PResident. This is no different then BUsh would have done.
Well, he did scrap Bush’s missile defense shield, right?
Uh, no.. not, really, he replaced it with his own version. (a little something for General Dynamics instead of Lockheed, maybe? Or Honeywell instead of Boeing? Who can say.)
If you want to stop nuclear weapons, and you’re the US, it’s kinda like what John Rotten said about rockstars complaining about having to be rockstars–JUST STOP BEING ONE THEN.
Dick.
12 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
What he meant…
America must have nuclear weapons, as must France, Britain, China, Russia, etc. in order to justify the entire nuclear end of the MIC. Which, if you haven’t noticed, is currently touting a “renaissance” of the most dangerous and expensive means of boiling water ever conceived with brand new used technology. With full intent to move straight into liquid metal cooled fast breeders within 20 years to produce much, much more of what we need – highly concentrated fissile uranium 233 and plutonium 239 from what we don’t need – thorium 232 and uranium 238. Saves a bundle on the cumbersome process of trying to get enough uranium 235 from naturally abundant 238 by old fashioned centrifugal force, or dealing with the notoriously filthy process of chemically recovering plutonium from extremely ‘hot’ spent fuel.
“Need” being a relative (and in this case, extremely deadly) term, of course…