Nuclear weapons are immoral

[Laudate_Dominum]

[b]Nuclear weapons are immoral[/b]

«[b]The current nuclear politics of the United States is immoral, illegal, militarily unnecessary and dreadfully dangerous[/b]». In North Korea and in Iran they fear a regime change imposed from outside, «so we must engage in bi-lateral negotiations to remove this fear». Interview with the former US Secretary of Defense, who in the ’sixties invented the American nuclear defense system

The interview with former secretary of defense Robert McNamara:
[url="http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo.asp?id=9590"]http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo.asp?id=9590[/url]

[i]If the United States continues its current nuclear stance, over time, substantial proliferation of nuclear weapons will almost certainly follow. Some, or all, of such nations as Egypt, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Taiwan will very likely initiate nuclear weapons programs[/i]

[Laudate_Dominum]

If this isn't much in the way of debate material I'll post something more provocative to save you mods the trouble of moving this to open mic.



George W. Bush offer[s] a false, and ideological, philosophy of freedom. Let it be called democratism. Democratism makes popular plebiscite the standard of freedom. It virtually equates the vox populi with God's will. And it expresses a faith in the progress of democracy and freedom that imitates biblical notions of divine providence. 'There is only one force in history,' the president declared [in his second inaugural], 'that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of freedom.' Democratism is the 'religion' that preaches the global spread of freedom through the adoption of democratic political mechanisms, and this freedom is supposed to bring universal peace to all humankind. Whereas in his joint speech to Congress the president failed to render a discrete narrative of American freedom, in his inaugural he left his listeners to infer, since he told no such story, that there is a narrative of universal human freedom.

There isn't a global narrative of freedom, however. To suggest that there is and, correlatively, to make the abstract claim that there is an unqualified - unqualified by either human sin or history - universal human desire of freedom, is a serious error at best and a false religion at worst. To use this ideology to justify the use of American power is to dance dangerously with demons. For, as with all ideologies, it will be (consciously or unconsciously) used to disguise other motives, both good and bad. - Vigen Guroian, Rallying the Really Human Things, pg. 199. ([i]copied from la nouvelle theologie[/i])


This might be fun too: [url="http://www.theotherjournal.com/article.php?id=55"]http://www.theotherjournal.com/article.php?id=55[/url]

[PadreSantiago]

I haven't read this interview yet but Robert McNamara is a genius. I think he is one of, if not the greatest defense secretary of all time. There's a great documentary about him called The Fog of War, if you are a history buff, or want to learn more about what really went down during Vietnam you should do yourself a favor and check this movie out THey have taped conversations between president johnson and his various cabniet members about what to do about Nam and it is chilling.

And I believe that quote you put there at the bottom. I'm sure you know what mutual assured destruction means? Well to these countries w/o nukes we are practically holding the sword of damocles over their throats. If I were in their shoes the only logical step of action is to devolope nuclear weapons so i can be protected by MAD. Otherwise I'm just a sitting target that has to do everything big brother America says.

Edited December 22, 2005 by PadreSantiago

[PadreSantiago]

oh yeah and dr strange love is hilarious i love that movie