Whispering about Nukes
Katie Mounts tips her hand plugging Catherine Collins' op-ed about the 2008 US presidential candidates' views on nuclear non-proliferation. Speaking of the horserace, the GOP candidates are divided, but Democrats are united on the issue.
The Democrats are generally in sync. Their responses indicate that all of them would insist that the United States live up to existing international treaties regulating nuclear technology. They are more apt to support broader disarmament and uniformly oppose developing new nuclear weapons, contradicting Bush's policy.
(…)
The Democrats said they are open to direct negotiations with nuclear hot spots like Iran and North Korea. They all promised to pressure Pakistan to allow outsiders to interrogate A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist who has been under house arrest for four years after confessing to selling nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.
For the record, I disagree with the Dems on China and direct negotiation with DPRK. But, Collins herself has convinced me Pakistan is a bigger problem than even Iran.
But, moving from issues to advisors, check out Spencer Ackerman on defense. The quick summary: Clinton is safe for the old guard; Obama flirts with counter-insurgency. Those advisors don't seem too concerned about nukes, either.
Call me a bridge, but I think a viable counter-terrorism strategy has a nuclear non-proliferation policy as one of its legs. Nukes are a big reason why anarchists and governments alike bristle with resentment at American arrogance and hypocrisy.
Sphere: Related Content
Barrapunto
CoRank Español
Delicious
Enchílame
Fresqui Ocio
Furl
Google Bookmarks
Menéame
Netscape
Newsvine
Stumbleupon
Technorati Favorites
Yahoo MyWeb
Write a comment
No trackbacks
RSS 2.0
Bloglines
Live
MyAOL
Netvibes
Newsgator
Rojo
