You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
SotU segment on nuclear weapons
2010-01-28
Even as we prosecute two wars, we are also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people - the threat of nuclear weapons. I have embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan through a strategy that reverses the spread of these weapons, and seeks a world without them. To reduce our stockpiles and launchers, while ensuring our deterrent, the United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades. And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring forty-four nations together behind a clear goal: securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.

These diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons. That is why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions - sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: they, too, will face growing consequences.
Does Barack Obama really think that Russian and American strategic nuclear weapons are a threat to world peace? It's like he's living in 1974. Our nuclear weapons are not the problem; it's the ones in North Korea, Pakistan and Iran that have the greatest chance of being used in the near future.

What of the 'threat' he made to Iran? Does that mean anything? He's not specific in the least. Why should Short Round and the Mad Mullahs™ be concerned? Obama hasn't followed through on anything else, why should the Mullahs think that he'll follow through on whatever the 'consequences' are?

Does anyone, anyone at all think that the sanctions against North Korea have done any good? No one thought the Clinton or Bush sanctions worked, and Obama is no more serious. If he wanted to go after North Korea, he could have singled them out specifically and told the suffering North Korean people that we stood with them. That would have gotten a reaction in Pyongyang, and it would have done that part of the world considerable good.

Finally, why wait four years to secure vulnerable nuclear weapons?
Posted by:Steve White

#1  The mullahs are having a hearty laugh at this. Consequences? We don't fear no stinkin' consequences, har!
Posted by: Spot   2010-01-28 08:09  

00:00