Politics
Out of context: Reply #20313
- Started
- Last post
- 33,469 Responses
- nb4
Today in the L.A. Times:
I was a Minuteman III nuclear launch officer. Take it from me: We can't let Trump become President (Op-Ed)
Since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, American presidents have thought of their nuclear responsibilities as the heaviest burden one could shoulder.
Harry Truman wrote, “We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world.” Dwight Eisenhower, no stranger to conflict, said that nuclear bombs have made war “not just tragic, but preposterous.” John F. Kennedy called the weapons a “sword of Damocles,” one all Americans were forced to live beneath.
Those men bring us to 2016 and the Republican candidate for president, Donald Trump, who also had some deep thoughts on nuclear weapons. That is, “if we have them, why can’t we use them?”
The very point of nuclear weapons is that they are never used. We have them to dissuade hostile powers from attacking us, and vice versa.
Deterrence, as this policy is known, has been the backbone of U.S. national security for decades. That a candidate for the highest office in the land needs this explained to him, not once but thrice, should give every voter pause.
Full article:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/o…- yepfadein11
- Trump warned viewers of the dangerous possibility of “having some maniac, having some madman go out and get a nuclear weapon,” and said “that's in my opinion,nb
- that is the single biggest problem that our country faces right now.”
I couldn’t agree more.nb - Meanwhile Obama plans $1 Trillion Nuclear Arms Upgradeomg
- very reluctantly, over 30 years, and in direct response to Russiamonospaced