|
Gauge -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/6/2007 9:02:35 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: caitlyn
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gauge
Just to re-focus, my issue is with how we justify telling others what to do when we do not do the same thing.
I have a basic problem with a double standard that we hold others accountable while we basically go unchecked. Who watches the watchers?
Not to justify it, only to understand it ...
If you study history very closely, you rapidly come to the conclusion that powereful nations stay powerful, when they write rules, enforce them on other people, but choose to break them themselves. Sad but true ... most of the time, when powerful nations start holding themselves to the standards they hold other to, they have signed their own death warrent. Playing fair and malevolent leadership, has more often made a power look weak to her enemies, rather than respected by her friends. In our case, our supposed friends are few and highly fickle.
Question back to you ... forget about right, wrong and fairness, since the world has never really been any of these things. Ask yourself the question from the standpoint of practicality. We build these 2,000 modern warheads to replace 6,000 older ones, and everyone raises a stink. Does that really matter, in the long term? What real result will this bring?
I think if you look at this honestly, you will say "no" and "none."
I will answer a question with a question: If it will make no difference or have no result, why do it at all?
Let me elaborate just a bit so you can understand my logic. I am not a firearms expert so my numbers may well be off but just bear with me for illustration purposes. If you have a gang and they are armed with 6,000 9mm semi-automatic pistols that fire 12 rounds as fast as you can pull the trigger and you take away 4,000 of them and replace the remaining 2,000 with a 9mm machine pistol that can fire 200 rounds per minute or the equivalent of the full 6,000 9mm pistols, what have you lost/gained?
Answer: You have gained/lost nothing.
Reducing numbers and keeping the same warhead count means nothing. If you are committed to disarmament then reduce your nukes and the warhead count to show that you are interested in reducing the threat of nuclear war.
I reiterate the statement that if we currently can kill everyone on the planet 10,000 times over, and reduce that number to 7,000 times over it is still overkill no matter how you look at it, but from a political standpoint it is a showing of good faith to arms reduction.
This proposal to replace these warheads could not have come at a worse time. Mechanically it may make sense but politically it is sending the wrong message when we are telling others not to develop their own nuclear programs.
|
|
|
|
