Obama Seeks Advice on Nuclear Weapons

[babylonsister]

So this explains the appearance of these men. I'm glad he's listening to everyone.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/obama-seeks-advice-on-nuclear-weapons/

Obama Seeks Advice on Nuclear Weapons
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg



Doug Mills/The New York Times A meeting spanning the generations.


President Obama pledged on Tuesday to make nuclear nonproliferation one of his highest priorities, saying he would work with Russia and other countries to “lock down loose nuclear weapons that could fall into the hands of terrorists.’’

Mr. Obama set forth his vision for a world without nuclear weapons during a speech last month in Prague. On Tuesday, he followed up with a high-powered meeting in the Oval Office with four men who, he said, inspired his policy: Republicans George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, both former secretaries of state; and Democrats Sam Nunn, the former senator, and William Perry, a former defense secretary. The four have offered a plan for reducing the world’s nuclear stockpiles, and Mr. Obama has endorsed it.

“I don’t think anybody would accuse these four gentlemen of being dreamers,’’ Mr. Obama told reporters after the meeting. “They’re hard-headed, tough defenders of American interests and American security. But what they have come together to help galvanize is a recognition that we do not want a world of continued nuclear proliferation, and that in order for us to meet the security challenges of the future, America has to take leadership in this area.’’

Mr. Obama convened the session amid rising concerns about nuclear weapons in nations like North Korea, Iran and Pakistan; his administration is planning to engage in multilateral talks with Iran over the issue. On Monday, Mr. Obama told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel that he hoped to know by the end of this year if those talks were making progress.

On Tuesday, the president suggested “some very specific steps’’ to reduce the dangers posed by nuclear weapons, including revitalizing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which does not include nuclear powers like India and Pakistan, and moving forward on a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which bans nuclear explosions but has not yet been put into effect.

“It’s going to require more work,’’ the president said, “but I think that we can get something accomplished there and we can lock down loose nuclear weapons that could fall into the hands of terrorists.’’

Mr. Shultz said he had only one quibble with the president’s words — Mr. Obama’s characterization of the group as bipartisan. “It’s really nonpartisan,’’ he said. “This is a subject that ought to somehow get above trying to get a partisan advantage.’’

[RandomThoughts]

1. I have thought alot about the loose nuke problems.

My thoughts on it actually started after the Minot thing.

But in my way of thinking, the fear it holds and who uses those threats of fear tells me which side that fear comes from. Furthermore I learn of some traps by seeing how others were tricked or deceived. Nash, of a Beautiful Mind, made a brilliant paper called game theory, that says what is best for both sides is a cumulative best for the all. It argues against one side always having a win and other a loss. it says work together and the better for all is a better way. And it gives an equation to show it. A very noble and good thing, the better thoughts for sure.

After that he got kicked around. And the method of getting kicked around (back decades ago), was fear of loose nukes. So I see a pattern of that as a fear element to get people scared. And see it as a trap and not real, for that reason I do not believe there are loose nukes, but only the fear of them.

However all efforts to control proliferation make sense and diligence also makes sense, bad things can happen, but fear of them can not control a person decisions, because in most cases fear is not of a real threat, but it in itself is the problem.

[SamCooke]

2. We need to get Israel to give up their nukes. We are their protection, they don't need them.

Also if they gave them up, maybe it would encourage others in the region, and if it didn't we would have a legit reason of bombing Iran.

[babylonsister]

3. Yea, that'll happen. nt

[SamCooke]

4. I'm a dreamer. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

5. I think Israel should give up its nukes if Iran and Syria recognize Israel and stop arming Hamas

Since most of the Middle East has accepted Israel's existence at this point, the nukes serve little deterrent effect. The only two threats remaining are Syria and Iran. If those two states make peace with Israel then I agree that Israel should give up its nukes.