Nuclear Limitations: Are You Kidding?

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

President Obama’s Nuclear Limitation Policy has drawn criticism from both sides of the fence and after reading the synopsis I can see why. In short it states that should you attack us with any thing other than nuclear weapons we won’t nuke you; we will only use nukes in extreme circumstances but we define extreme and finally we will not further our nuclear aerosol. The United States will keep in place those warheads it has and oh yeah, this only applies to those nations that have signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Do you see a problem yet?

Let us look at this from how the average, common sense using American does. Should you attack us with a biological weapon our first response is not “nuke them!” Our first response would be how could we get the antidote? Which we already know over government does not have a stockpile of, nor do they provide us with education on how to treat, contain and eliminate the spread of such an attack, that information is privileged. Should you attack us with a chemical weapon, all of the above still applies. However.

Should you choose to attack us with a conventional weapon, I will forewarn you, bad move. In order to attack us with a conventional weapon you have to be in our hood, not smart and I will tell you why. We are a gun toting, uneducated, mixed breed, just not happy, nation right now. We are just looking for something to take our state of the union frustrations out on. To us justice is represented as a blind woman holding two scales; ever heard of a woman scorned? Beware.

Only use in extreme circumstances, hum, that is sort of an oxymoron to us. Nuclear weapon means extreme, how do you define it otherwise? We are confused as well with this revised clause to our countries policy. As to not rebuilding and merely keeping in place the nuclear weapons we have, let us just say, let’s all step back and count to ten. Do we really need for us all to be alike, I think not. We merely have to respect the other’s point of view and agreeably agree to disagree.

Finally, the formality of signing this treaty; we have often wondered about these treaties. What purpose does a treaty serve when the only ones abiding to it are those whom have signed it? It occurs to us that those who would spoil the party are those not invited. Isn’t that how it goes, the kids left out of the game are the ones who get recess cancelled for everyone.

Personally, I think this is time not well spent by our President right now. Poverty, hunger, education, and just a general mess of his country should be a little higher on his priority list. But then what do I know; I tend to think with what god gave me, common sense.

Going UP