tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post4046723786294903032..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: The Man Who Refused To Drink Champagne At Alamoagordo On July 16, 1945Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-70193312793898323772016-08-10T14:20:03.730-04:002016-08-10T14:20:03.730-04:00Yes, Steve, I am "afraid of Trump." It ...Yes, Steve, I am "afraid of Trump." It took decades for Thomas Schelling's focal point doctrine of "no first use of nuclear weapons" to become accepted by the major nuclear powers. Now some people around Putin at the time of the Crimean annexation and the imposition of economic sanctions over that matter started going on about how Russia could still "nuke New York City," so they started the retreat from that doctrine. But now we learn that along with calling for Japan and South Korea to obtain nuclear weapons, in contravention of long established non-proliferation doctrines (and this supposedly to save the US some money), he is reported to have asked a national security expert three times in an hour, "Why can we not just use our nuclear weapons?" and some of his statements have sounded like that is just what he wants to do about ISIS.<br /><br />This is a reason why we have just seen 50 Republican national security experts come out against him on the grounds that he is a danger to US national security, not to mention to world peace, because of his apparent ignorance and tendency to shoot from the hip with regard to nuclear weapons.<br /><br />Maybe he is going to calm down and get real on all that now that I gather he is getting intel briefings, but he has certainly made a bunch of statements that make the late Barry Goldwater look like a high priest of reason with regard to nuclear weapons.<br /><br />As for Hillary, there is every reason to believe that she accepts long standing policies, and she is clearly both very knowledgeable and cautious and experienced with these matters, even if I have concerns about her being more hawkish than I like on some matters.<br /><br />On that latter, I note that Trump is excoriating her for her vote on the Iraq war, which she has since agreed was a mistake. He claims he was against the war, but in fact he supported at the time it happened, so this is yet one more of way too many lies he puts out.<br /><br />Bottom line, I view him as far far more dangerous in connection with nuclear weapons than I view her.rosserjb@jmu.eduhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300046915843554101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-45981725000720821222016-08-10T13:51:34.035-04:002016-08-10T13:51:34.035-04:00So, Clinton is clearly on line with the nuclear &q...So, Clinton is clearly on line with the nuclear "option" as are all of her advisors and surrogates, but you are afraid of Trump? Astonishing blindness.restless94110https://www.blogger.com/profile/15891731992671061172noreply@blogger.com