A group of disarmament activists led by main sponsor the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) have issued two reports advocating deep cuts to the nuclear arsenal and a massive reduction to the weapons infrastructure. First, the NRDC are a far left environmental group that has opposed pretty much every weapons system the US has ever wanted to deploy. So their latest report is not too surprising. However, they are being just described as nuclear weapons experts, which I admit they are, with no mention of their long history of wanting “peace through unilateral disarmament”
An article describing the latest report can be seen at “Global Security Newswire”. One big quote from the article immediately drew my attention for its MASSIVE contradiction. Read the full quote below and see if you can spot it before I comment afterwords.
“A new ‘minimal deterrence’ mission will make retaliation after nuclear attack the sole mission for nuclear weapons,” the assessment states. “We believe that adopting this doctrine is an important step on the path to nuclear abolition because nuclear retaliation is the one mission for nuclear weapons that reduces the salience of nuclear weapons; it is the self-canceling mission. With just this one mission, the United States can have far fewer nuclear forces to use against a different set of targets.”
Did you see the contradiction? They want to downsize to a force capable of mimimum deterrence or the least number of weapons needed to deter enemies. This force will be have as it sole mission to retaliate AFTER a nuclear attack.
Why would we have to respond after a nuclear attack if we have enough weapons to deter our enemies, oops. We can say deterrence worked during the Cold War because there were NO ATTACKS not because there was just a few.
So only after deterrence fails and five milllion Americans are vaporized in a nuclear fireball whose temperature exceeeds that of the surface of the Sun will we use our nukes. But I have another secret about these groups, which I have studied for years (to give the NRDC credit their “Nuclear Weapons Databook” series is excellent).
First, I guarantee they would council against retaliation and use the tragedy of a nuke over Manhatten to INCREASE calls for total disarmament. Secondly, they have always blamed the US for any arms race and would advocate unilateral disarmament. They do not beleive nukes will ever be used and that the entire nuclear infrastructure has been a waste of money. They really want no nukes RIGHT NOW. They hide behind what they believe to be reasonable arguments.
There is no “real” strategic rationale for going under the current number of deployed weapons (which have been massively reduced since the end of the Cold War by the way, something Obama misconstues when he equates the current arsenal to the Cold War) Cutting weapons will not enhance our security and may actually embolden aggressors to “match” US capabilities that they can now never really hope to do.