We won’t attack you with our nukes, but woe unto he who dares attack us. Still valid?
Teaching courses on arms control.
It is the existence of the weapons themselves — not who has them — that poses the greatest threat.
The Obama administration is trying to decide on its nuclear “posture.” What stance will nuclear weapons assume in U.S. national security strategy? At ease or at attention? Supine, prone, or erect?
Nuclear Disarmament and Ronald Reagan: ‘Trust, But Verify’
To hawks, verification is another hammer with which to bludgeon disarmament.
Nuclear taboo? We all know taboos are made to be broken.
Proponents of deterrence claim that should it fail and nuclear war break out, we’d still come out ahead of where we would be if deterrence hadn’t been our policy all these years. Today, though, most don’t want to hear naked calculations about the possible sacrifice of millions of lives to save hundreds of millions of lives.
Wow, 100 issues of Nota Bene! Props to Russ for helping me for a while with this nifty little S&R feature. Never mind all that now, let’s get on with this issue. […]
For the sake of argument: Do extraterrestrials place constraints on our use of nukes?
What’s to keep the START treaty from winding up as watered down as President Obama’s feeble attempts at bank and healthcare reform?