Jeremy Boreing at BigGovernment gave us a tour de force this weekend on why we should stop worrying and learn to love the bomb. He directly addressed President Obama’s speech at the United Nations and in just over a dozen paragraphs, Mr. Boreing managed to demolish a few of the Left’s most cherished notions, e.g., that nuclear weapons are evil, and that a world without nuclear weapons will be a utopia where billions of lives are no longer under threat of annhiliation.
It seems lost on the American President that he was not elected to create or perfect a world order, but to elevate the interests of the United States. He was not selected by a world assembly but by Americans, who extracted from him a sworn oath to defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign or domestic. That same Constitution calls the president the Chief Executive of the Untied States. Imagine if the chief executive of Wal-Mart attended an economic forum and suggested a willingness to make his company less successful in the interest of promoting the perceived success of his competitors. It is unlikely that he would remain CEO for long…
Boreing also tags a zinger in there about socialism:
Utopian dreams rarely have any connection to reality. The socialist ideal of transferring power and wealth from the few to the many is proven a delusion once one realizes that the method socialists use to accomplish this goal is powerful government, thus making the true reality of socialism the transfer of power and wealth from the few to the far fewer. It is the same with this pre-adolescent belief that a world without nuclear weapons would be a better or more peaceful one. In actuality, nuclear weapons have maintained the closest thing the world has ever known to global peace for over sixty years.
And on the absolute necessity for the major powers to retain their nuclear arsenals, he has this to say:
…War is no longer sustainable, but it never-the-less still exists. The reason they are not fought between the large powers, the reason they cannot be, is that the nuclear weapon makes them unwinnable. For that reason, the major powers, America, Britain, France, Russia, and China do well to maintain their weapons. They do no harm, and yet they do great, great good. They have already saved perhaps hundreds of millions of lives, and even if one is one day used surreptitiously by a terrorist organization to kill tens of thousands of people, they still will have been a net gain to society of a thousand times that number of lives saved. Why then would the President of the United States, the country that has, armed with these devices, kept so great a peace for so long, seek to eliminate them?
Mr. Boreinger makes some excellent points, and I urge you to read the whole article.
But before you despair that Obama might actually achieve such a world-changing and potentially disastrous goal, ask yourself this: Isn’t it likely that Obama’s U.N. rhetoric is yet another instance of the President’s seeming inability to close the deal on myriad initiatives he has been pushing (health care, cap and tax, closing Guantanamo Bay, etc.)?
We can only hope so, as the alternative scenario is too grim to imagine.