Last month, I lambasted Edwards for proposing the blatantly irresponsible policy of nuclear weapons elimination. Now, Obama is proposing the kind of nuclear policy that would both limit the risk of nuclear conflict and nuclear terrorism and not leave us defenseless:
Barack Obama is set to deliver a speech today taking on an old issue — nuclear disarmament — that has proven hazardous for Democrats to tackle since the Reagan years. Obama will advocate for a multilateral reduction in nuclear stockpiles, arguing that in the age of global terrorism the Cold War weapons have become “increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective.”
Obama is not arguing for a total disarmament, however. Instead, his plan would reportedly bring America’s stockpile of nuclear weapons to their lowest level since the 1950’s — but they would not be gone entirely.
This is fantastic. It has its obvious benefits, such as preventing the stealing of nukes by terrorists and nuclear sales between states. When there are fewer weapons to start with, there’s less risk that they’ll be used inappropriately. But also, it ensures that if a country breaks the agreement we’ll have a way to prevent them from striking. It’s the definitive progressive nuclear plan, and I’m glad Obama took the risk of proposing it (on the fifth anniversary of his famed, and eerily prescient, antiwar speech, no less).