Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Fukushima No. 1 engineer’s warning to Taiwan: Nuclear power unstable [View all]PamW
(1,825 posts)It's DELUSIONAL to make the claim above that someone is "losing an argument".
At this point, we only have a difference of opinion as to how to keep this great nation safe and secure.
In the face of the fact that Russia targets nuclear-tipped missiles at the United States, Iterate believes our response is to have peaceniks go to the Conference on Disarmament and Global Zero. Sure maybe it's less carbon; but do you REALLY "think" ( term used advisedly ) that Putin is really going to listen to a bunch of peaceniks on nuclear disarmament?
GET REAL. Putin doesn't care a whit about peaceniks at some self-serving conference. ( They're probably smoking more dope than talking anyway. )
The only thing that is going to counter the force that Russia threatens the USA with; is the force the USA has to threaten back.
That's NOT "waving the flag". I'm pointing out a REAL capability that the USA has; and it is that capability that holds the Russian threat in check.
Come on; President Obama, a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for his stance on nuclear weapons, acknowledges that the USA has to maintain its present nuclear deterrent. As the Obama Administration's own Nuclear Posture Review 2010 states:
http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/2010%20Nuclear%20Posture%20Review%20Report.pdf
At the same time, as long as nuclear weapons exist, the United States must sustain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal - to maintain stability with other major nuclear powers, deter potential adversaries, and reassure our allies and partners of our security commitments to them.
That's NOT "flag waving"; that's US national security policy and commitments in foreign policy.
It's the REAL WORLD and not some dope-induced fantasy of the peaceniks.
PamW