avatar
“Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option”


This one ought to illustrate for you — in case you are still in need of any illustration — just how dangerous our world is.  Not because of the various bogeymen whose faces are rattled over our cribs every day by our political leadership and the establishment news media.  But because of the profoundly violent and runaway-train characteristics of the political systems in the states most of us call home:

 

"Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option, Nato told," Ian Traynor, The Guardian, January 22, 2008

 

And it sure would make for a nice question for each of the U.S. presidential candidates to try to answer — in case one of you has YouTube capabilities.  Namely:

 

Recently, there have been reports that NATO’s leadership is contemplating the recommendation of an internal review to the effect that NATO "resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack [on non-NATO members] to try to halt the ‘imminent’ spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction," as London’s Guardian newspaper reported on January 22. 

 

(1) Do you agree or disagree with this policy?  

 

(2.a) If you disagree with it, are you willing to renounce first-use of nuclear weapons by the United States, and to ensure that this becomes NATO policy as well?  

 

(2.b) If you agree with it, do you also believe that other states and even non-state actors around the world possess equal rights to strike "pre-emptively" against NATO member states, before NATO strikes against them?

 


David Peterson
Chicago, USA

Leave a comment