Then, 2008 brought us Obama.
Now, W and Obama are friends.
“Ukraine was stupid for giving up their nukes and even stupider for not developing an new nuclear deterrent already.”
Well, yes and no. After the Soviet Union fell a UN inspection team was going around verifying Soviet weapons and their condition. A mobile launcher with one missile and three nuclear warheads was supposed to be in a remote section of woods. The team found the missile which was abandoned but there was an encampment and signs of recent use. The team waited and at dark the missile crew returned. They had been out hunting. They hadn’t been fed or paid in months. This is the situation much of the former soviet states found themselves in.
Fighter planes were being stolen from airbases. Weapons were being sold directly from military stores. The former soviet states had no money and the weapons were a danger to the entire world. The one thing Clinton did that I respect is have the CIA start buying anything that appeared on the market. While that may have increased the market, it at least kept the weapons from falling into the hands of organizations like Hezbollah.
A real concern was that ethnic tensions (ain’t diversity wonderful?) would flare up, but with nuclear weapons. The situation Ukraine was faced with was a complete collapse of society. That’s anarchy, but with nuclear weapons. Given what they faced at the time, getting rid of the weapons was the best thing they could do.
South Afrika did the same thing, but for slightly different reasons. They knew that once the white run government fell that a spectacularly corrupt kleptocracy would take over and that is what happened. It was the most responsible thing they could do.
Imagine how bad things are when you realize the safest thing for yourself and your loved ones is to downsize your weapons load. To us it’s unimaginable. But, we haven’t ever faced a total collapse. (We might not be too far away, though.)
A very solid, cogent post.
**Thanks**, this is so rare these days on the board.
bkmk