The trouble with 'no-nukes-palooza'

NY Post ^ | April 8, 2010 | Peter Brookes

[Scanian]

On Tuesday, the Obama admin istration released its new nu clear strategy; today, the prez will ink a new nuke treaty with the Russians in Prague. Next week, he'll host an all-world atomic affair in Washington. It's a veritable "no-nukes-palooza."

Problem is, not all nuclear cutbacks are wise.

Next week's DC summit makes sense: It's focused on securing nuclear materials -- making it harder, for example, for terrorists to acquire an A-bomb. But the other two "events" raise serious concerns.

The new nuclear strategy aims to create a smaller nuclear force. But that force is already aging, and thus growing inherently less reliable.

Smaller and aging creates a clearly less-credible deterrent. That, in turn, encourages bad actors to rely more heavily on nukes.

How so? By "building down," we make it easier for the likes of Iran and North Korea (as well as future proliferators such as Syria and potential big-power adversaries) to envision matching our nuclear capabilities. Rather than inevitable US superiority, they'll see potential vulnerability -- which makes the world more dangerous, not less.

[Paul Ross]

Rather than inevitable US superiority, they'll see potential vulnerability -- which makes the world more dangerous [for the United States] , not less.

Correct.

And that is Obama's objective.

[john mirse]

off topic: Moderator: Another thread is locked. Why is that? I have never seen a thread locked here before. Just wondering. Thanks.