Tag: Nuclear Zero
Although China has a much larger nuclear arsenal than the DOD and arms control advocates are prepared to admit, Russia remains the principal nuclear and geopolitical adversary of the US.
The Obama Administration, in what amounts to unilateral arms reduction, is the cook using the same ingredients that 90 years ago would prove to create an explosive dish called World War II. The ingredients for disaster are amassed, and it appears that Barack Obama with his “nuclear utopianism” is just the chef to pull it off.
A small nuclear arsenal would not be survivable – it would be easy for an enemy to destroy in a first strike. The smaller it is, the less survivable and easier to destroy in a first strike it is.
It was therefore not surprising (even though not pleasant, either) to see both of these rabid anti-nuclear activists to write new garbage screeds calling for deep, unilateral cuts in the US nuclear arsenal and the fleet of its delivery systems – ostensibly to save money.
So now, as the Congress mulls whether to save defense from sequestration, they are protesting and pressuring the Congress to allow the sequester’s deep, unjustifiable, disproportionate defense cuts to occur. So I’d like to present the facts to the Congress and the public: 6 reasons why defense spending sequestration should not and must not occur.
Her reference to “open source technologies in arms control and non-proliferation verification,” is nothing less than a call to the members of her audiences to become self-styled wiki-leakers, in the tradition of Julian Assange, who will use the constant threat of having sensitive information exposed on the Internet, as a tool to push their radical “nuclear zero” agenda.