Obama's Missed Opportunity: America's Resumption Of The Nuclear Arms Race

James Carroll, columnist at the Boston Globe and occasional writer at TomDispatch, appears mirrored at Juan Cole's Informed Comment blog, writing about the great opportunity Obama had in 2009 to turn America, and hence the rest of the nuclear-armed nations of the world, toward a path to nuclear disarmament, or at least a drastic reduction in the number of nuclear-tipped missiles armed and ready to go at any moment. The short version: ultimately, despite his grand announcement, Obama listened to the hardcore hawks, and America is on course to modernize, not decommission, its nuclear arsenal.

'Fat Man' - Nagasaki,
Aug. 9, 1945

When I was a young child, a boy in grade school, W.W. II, with its first... America's and the world's first... use of an atomic bomb in war, was recent history, and the Cold War was ratcheting up. Classrooms full of school kids learned to do duck-and-cover drills, on command from the teacher. There were lists of steps we were supposed to take when told to "drop," lists to which some wag always appended one additional step after "Place head between legs": "Kiss your a$$ goodbye." Most of us understood there was no going back from a direct nuclear attack on the City of Houston: virtually everyone would die, and we knew it.

In the 1970s, some steps were taken toward reducing the magnitude (not the direness) of the US-Soviet nuclear conflict. As a consequence, by the 1980s, the era of Saint Reagan, the hawks began to talk of "winnable nuclear war"; once again, humanity faced extinction by the crazy men in Washington and Moscow. The same nutjobs began to talk of nuclear weapons in space as well as defensive weapons in space.

Reagan himself claimed to have "won" the Cold War by arming the US to the point at which the Soviet Union could not keep up. (Gorbachev, as quoted by Peter Jennings on ABC evening news, called this claim "utter crap.") According to a chart at Wikipedia, the US peaked at more than 30,000 nuclear weapons; the Soviet Union, 40,000.

The number didn't begin to decrease until Ronald Reagan left office, replaced by his veep, George H.W. Bush. Subsequently, nuclear arms in both nations were decreased in number, leveling off at about 5000. (The number depends on what you count as a "weapon": I suspect the 5000 is a count of warheads, because I've seen counts of the number of missiles that were considerably lower.)

I do not know how much credence to give to Carroll's extremely pessimistic assumption that there's no going back once Obama decided to follow the hawks' advice and modernize the nuclear forces. There is the fact that at least four more nations have joined the nuclear "club," with more sure to follow. In addition, every terrorist group in the world will continue to do its damnedest to get its hands on one or more nukes, though all of them face delivery difficulties that may prove insurmountable (we can hope!).

But if Carroll is right, and Obama has truly abandoned his hopeful determination in 2009, then the children and grandchildren of my first cousins (cousins only a few years older than me) will learn to duck-and-cover... and kiss their a$$es goodbye. Heaven help us all.

BOOM! Senate Goes Nuclear On Filibuster Rules

About damned time, IMHO... here's TPM's Sahil Kapur:

After years of threats and warnings, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and his Democratic majority on Thursday executed the "nuclear option" to eliminate the filibuster for executive branch and judicial nominees, except for the Supreme Court.

Fifty-two Democrats voted against upholding the filibuster rules after Republicans again blocked cloture on the nomination of Patricia Millett to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Democratic Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Mark Pryor (D-AR) voted with Republicans to sustain the filibuster rules.

"Republicans have routinely used the filibuster to prevent President Obama from appointing his executive team or confirming judges," Reid said on the Senate floor. "We're burning wasted hours and wasted days between filibusters. I could say instead we're burning wasted days and wasted weeks between filibusters. ... It's time to change. It's time to change the Senate before this institution becomes obsolete."

...

"Is the Senate working now? Can anyone say the Senate is working now?" the majority leader said before the vote. "I don't think so."

The "Reid Rule," as supporters are calling it, does not affect the minority party's ability to filibuster Supreme Court nominees or legislation.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) fumed at Reid's decision, accusing him of trying to change the subject from Obamacare and "cook up some fake fight over judges." He argued that "by any objective standard, Senate Republicans have been very, very fair to this president" when it comes to letting him appoint his nominees.

Excuse me, Mr. Minority Leader, but... bullshit. Time after time, the GOP has filibustered Obama's nominations, offering no substantive complaint about the nominee, filibustering for no other reason than that it was Obama who nominated him/her.

Regular readers know I am not particularly fond of Obama, and I have not always been fond of his nominees, either. But McConnell's whining and grousing notwithstanding, tradition is that presidents have been served by the officials they have nominated, typically (though not always) of their own party, the filibuster being reserved only for the most extremist of individuals, the deliberate sharp stick in the eye, the person nominated for no other reason than to create discord. Whatever else he has done, Obama has not nominated people for the purpose of pure aggravation of Republicans. But Dog knows Republicans have filibustered his nominees for pure aggravation of Obama, not for any substantive flaw in the nominees.

I regret only that Reid waited so painfully long to trigger the H-bomb. And Republicans? They can go suck on corkscrews until the points come out the backs of their necks.

ASIDE: the bomb in the picture above was accidentally (!) dropped near Albuquerque in 1957, very nearly taking out the city and an air force base ^^{[added] with its conventional explosives alone}^. At least we can be relatively confident that Reid's nuke was no accident.

Expected Result Of US Preemptive War On Iraq:N. Korea Threatens Nuclear Attack On US

Trinity Test, July 16, 1945

Many of us have expected something like this ever since Preznit George W. Bush ordered the US to launch a preemptive invasion of Iraq: North Korea is threatening a preemptive nuclear strike against the US.

Yes, of course, it's insane. Yes, of course, North Korea probably does not have a nuclear weapon light enough in weight to be carried to the US by missile technology currently available to North Korea. Yes, of course, if they were to succeed, their own ashes would be glowing within hours. It's crazy. Kim Jong Un is apparently even more insane than his daddy.

But the threat itself is utterly predictable, and I blame Preznit George W. Bush, who attacked Iraq unprovoked after concocting and presenting to the UN wholly false accusations that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks. That was crazy, too, and it opened the door for other nations to engage in future preemptive attacks on dubious or wholly fraudulent grounds.

That future is now. Those of you who supported Preznit Bush... those who supported the whole concept of preemptive invasion... I hope you enjoy the result.

(H/T DSWright of FDL.)