30 comments posted · 3 followers · following 0
I assume you're right though.
Yeah, I have realized that many people here don't want to have their opinions questioned. Fortunately, I don't really care. :)
As for the rest, I think it just comes down to difference in world view. Reagan had a world view that was essentially very positive. I liked his stance on nuclear proliferation. It WAS "peace through superior fire power" - Reagan understood, as he mentions in the speech I quoted above, that MAD was NOT superior firepower. It was merely equal firepower, that upon provocation would only lead to both super powers' destruction. It was not sustainable.
The only way to decrease the risk of nuclear attack/war is to reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons. I am frankly a bit surprised that this is apparently a "hot topic" - I honestly thought that this was settled back in Reagan's day as a laudable goal.
I don't think me arguing it any more than I have will change anyone's mind though. :)
Obviously, the efforts by pretty much all previous administrations have not worked as intended, at least not when it comes to North Korea. Something new is needed. It doesn't mean we can just arm us to the teeth and pretend that keeps us safe.
Obama is so far in many respects just continuing what Bush started. If he doesn't take action soon, I'd say it's getting to be time to charge Obama with war crimes, along with Bush, Cheney, Yoo and the others.
Might not be the answer you were looking for though. ;)