Nuclear disarmament

Obama would like to have a world free of nuclear weapons, and he and Russian president Medvedev have agreed to restart the nuclear disarmament talks. Although he doesn't expect that ideal goal to be reached in his lifetime, Obama is both an idealist and a pragmatist.

When it comes to Iran and North Korea and their nuclear weapons ambitions, Obama brings a quality to the negotiations that was missing in his predecessor, who could only think in terms of black/white, good guys/evil guys, and who only spoke the language of bluster and aggression.

Obama has the capacity to think strategically about the other side's point of view. There's just a hint that "nuclear politics" may be on the table along with "numbers of warheads" and who's got the biggest one? Negotiations that start and end with "Iran can never be allowed to have nuclear arms capability" will be very different when we consider why Iran (or North Korea) may genuinely feel the need to have the bomb and then seek ways to reduce that need.

Iran is not seeking the bomb because we have it. They feel threatened by Israel and its bombs and by our troops on their borders (and our special operations forces operating inside Iran even now). Suppose the situation were reversed and we didn't have the bomb, but Russia and China and Iran and North Korea did? And if we were treated as a global pariah for trying to make one too?

Is there some law written somewhere in the universe that says it's ok for the U.S. (the only country that has ever used a nuclear weapon against another country) to have them, and for Israel and Pakistan to have them, but not Iran?

I am not for a minute saying I want Iran to have nuclear weapons. I wish no one did. What I am saying is that we have to take a broader view than the assumption that we have the right and they don't. Obama is at least willing to have talks with them without first insisting that they prove that they are not building a bomb.

What if they really aren't and are only, as they say, seeking nuclear energy for peaceful uses? Our intelligence was wrong about Iraq and WMD.

Ralph

Small and cheap

This was an eye-opener for me.

I am a member of an interactive blog, TheBackFence, and the discussion has lately turned to the question of nuclear disarmament. One of the other members is Peter Zimmerman, who is a physicist and arms-control expert. He is a former Chief Scientist for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

He is careful not to reveal classified material, but he has shared some information that was quite surprising and a bit frightening to me. Here's a sample:

Let me tell you three dirty little secrets about nuclear weapons, that don't show up in most of the pro and con arguments:

1. Nuclear weapons are cheap, really cheap. A simple nuclear bomb probably doesn't cost 10% of the fighter-bomber needed to carry it. Well under $10M. The plutonium would cost much less than $1M to make in a government reactor.

2. Nuclear weapons are incredibly small and light. I have picked up full size/full weight dummy weapons used for training with my two hands and not had much trouble. Since we have 155 mm nuclear artillery rounds, it's pretty obvious that you can make a nuclear weapon that's less than six inches in diameter. You have to get pictures of Fat Man and Little Boy out of your mind; nukes aren't like that any more!

3. Nuclear weapons are very simple to make. I've written articles and co-wrote a novel about nuclear terror in which small groups build there own starting only with the uranium or plutonium. Most designs are very fault tolerant.

From this it follows that there are a lot of people who know how nuclear weapons are built, and that modern weapons are incredibly easy to hide and hard to find. And further, this tells us that if we do sign a treaty banning nukes, somebody somewhere will keep a few or few dozen in a mineshaft somewhere, and we'll never find them.

The amazing thing is that nuclear weapons have existed since 1945 and never been used again after our bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's even more amazing, given how small and relatively cheap these modern versions are. It certainly changes the ease with which they could be smuggled in or out of a country.

Ralph

Perseveration

"Perseveration is the uncontrollable repetition of a particular response, such as a word, phrase, or gesture, despite the absence or cessation of a stimulus, usually caused by brain injury or other organic disorder." (Wikipedia).

One might say Republicans perseverate their mantra of tax cuts, despite ample proof that it is just not the answer.

On April 1 (April Fools Day, you know?), House Republicans released their alternate budget plan that would revoke the stimulus, freeze all spending, and slash taxes for the wealthiest Americans and corporations.

Citizens for Tax Justice has found that under the GOP plan the average CEO would get a $1.5 million tax break, while the poorest Americans would have to pay more taxes.

Just what we need. Just what the public wants to hear, when outrage at CEO bonuses was about to ignite and galvanize the out-of-work masses.

Are they crazy, self-destructive, or is it some sly bait-and-switch game?

Ralph

Dr. Laura praises same-sex relationships ( !?!?!)

I don't know what to make of this: is this a genuine change in one of the notorious anti-gay bigots of a few years ago?

Dr. Laura Schlessinger has a PhD in physiology and no clinical background at all, but that did not stop her from dispensing therapy-sounding advice to callers on her popular radio talk show a few years back. She came across as something between a stern parent and a moralizing scourge. Audiences who like to hear someone else get raked over the coals loved it.

People who aren't sadistic (hit him again) or masochistic (thanks, I needed that) were horrified at her abusive, non-therapist type responses to callers with problems.

But her vehement anti-gay comments got her into such trouble that her career went into a downturn. Her fledgling TV show was canceled, and she lost many of her radio spots. Now, on a recent Larry King interview she was singing a different tune, saying that while she's no supporter of gay marriage, she supports same-sex relationships as a "very healthy and very positive thing."

SCHLESSINGER: I'm very big on human beings finding love, attachment and commitment and being faithful to it, because there's more to benefit when there is real true commitment and faithfulness to it. I still believe, as just every president has, and all the people who ran for office, that marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman. So not calling it marriage works for me. But that two people would have that sort of commitment to me is very healthy and very positive thing in their lives and society as a whole.

KING: So, you favor marriage between a man and a woman, but you applaud the fact that even people of the same-sex can have that kind of commitment to each other.

SCHLESSINGER: That's a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.

OK. We could argue about why not call it marriage; but the startling point here is that this seems a major reversal by the scourge who used to quote the Bible about homosexuality being an abomination. We'll never know how many vulnerable gay teenage kids listening to this were pushed over the edge to suicide.

It was such a big issue that a "letter to Dr. Laura" circulated on the internet for years, in which the writer asked for advice about some of the other "abominations" listed in the same Bible passage. Here are some choices passages:

"I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?"

"Lev.25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?"

"I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?"

Sometimes ridicule is the best defense.

Has Dr. Laura become enlightened? Has she had a change of heart, perhaps finding out that someone she knows well and loves is gay? Or is she still just the show-biz maven who realizes anti-gay bigotry is not the cash cow it once was and she'd better change her tune?

Ralph

Newt's outrage

Newt Gingrich is outraged at the Iowa Supreme Court's decision that legalized gay marriage. Announcing that he was starting a "major movement" to curb the judicial branch of government, Newt declared that the Iowa decision was "outrageously wrong."

"It's the height of judicial arrogance," he said. "You have seven lawyers who have decided, on their own, to fundamentally change Iowa." He neglected to mention that it was a unanimous decision, 7-0, presumably all Iowans themselves, given that it's the Iowa Supreme Court.

So what business is Iowa's marriage law to Newt -- a displaced Yankee who taught history at a second rate Georgia college and then took over Congress until he flamed out over his own moral failings?

Excuse me, Newt, but where was this outrage 8 years ago? It took only five U.S. Supreme Court justices to change the course of national and world history when they stopped the recount of votes in Florida and anointed george w. bush as president on a 5-4 vote.

Yes, one vote can make that much difference. And I vehemently disagreed with that decision -- which would have gone the other way with one justice voting differently. But we didn't storm the halls of justice and throw the bums out.

As a former history professor and congressman, Newt should have a better grasp of government than this. Seven lawyers didn't just "decide on their own;" they interpreted the constitution, which is their job. If you disagree with their decision, that's ok. But it's typical of Newt's immaturity to want to tear down the house when he doesn't get his way.

Or is he just trying to gin up some furor to propel himself into a presidential race? He's tried several other tactics, including getting religion and being blessed by James Dobson, or was it Pat Robertson? Nothing has worked for Newt so far; maybe he thinks the gay marriage card will be the ticket.

Sorry, Newt. That's just so . . . 2004!

Ralph

Obama the rationalist

From Politico:

As Barack Obama returns from Europe on Tuesday, he has in bright, bold strokes revealed his signature on the world stage: He is Obama the rationalist.

A diverse set of Obama decisions in recent days have a common theme: a leader who sees himself building a more orderly, humane world by vanquishing outdated thinking and corrupting ideology.

With a rapid series of major announcements and rhetorical gestures, the new president has done more than turn from Bush-era policies. He has shined a vivid light on his philosophical outlook on the world — and how starkly he differs from his predecessor on basic beliefs about power, diplomacy and even human nature.
--------
What’s now clear is that even when Bush and Obama shared objectives — such as blocking Iran’s pursuit of nuclear bombs — they are pursuing them with a different style that flows from a different worldview.

An administration that believed in the primacy of force has been replaced by one that believes in the primacy of dialogue. A president who believed his main job in the world was to robustly assert American interests and values, even if it offended allies, has been succeeded by one who believes his main job is to gently coax and nourish communities of interest in which other nations will regard the United States as a friend.
--------
In fact, the dividing line between Bush and Obama may be less ideology than human nature — whether people, and countries, are more likely moved by force or by persuasion.

And I would add: a belief in the evidence of science and the rule of law, the rights of all rather than the advantage to the few, and government as the solution, not the problem.

Ralph

Did Rick Warren lie about Prop8?

Saddleback mega-church pastor Rick Warren, who gave the invocation at Obama's inauguration, went on Larry King's show Monday night and said this:

In the first place, I am not an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. I never have been, never will be.

During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never -- never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going.

In what seems to be a contradiction of himself, here is a video clip of Pastor Warren, saying:

"By the way, the election's coming up in a couple of weeks, and I hope you're praying about your vote. One of the propositions I want to mention is Proposition 8, which is the proposition that had to be instituted because the courts threw out the will of the people. And a court, of four guys actually, voted to change a definition of Christian . . . er, a definition of marriage that had been going for 5,000 years.

"Now let me just say this really clearly: We support Proposition 8, and if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate, but on moral issues, I come out very clear."

He then goes on to say, erroneously, that "every culture for 5,000 years and every religion for 5,000 years has said that the definition of marriage is between one man and a woman." Just a moment earlier he had been even more definitive: "one man and one woman, for life."

What's all that in the Bible about multiple wives, Pastor? What about the Mormons? And multiple wives are allowed under certain circumstances in both Islam and Hinduism. You should study your religious history before you spout off, Pastor.

But he's thinking about homosexuality, not polygamy. So he goes on:

"There are about 2% of the population are homosexual, or gay, lesbian. We should not let 2% of the population determine, er, change a definition of marriage that has been supported by every single culture and every single religion for 5,000 years.

"This is not even just a Christian issue; it's a humanitarian and human issue. God created marriage for family and love and procreation. So I urge you to support Proposition 8 and pass that word on. I'm going to be sending out a note to pastors on what I believe about this, but everybody knows what I believe about it. They heard me at the Civil Forum when I asked both Obama and McCain on their views."

At the very least, Warren is slippery with the truth. This video apparently was one he had on his web site, addressed to his parishioners, but available for anyone who visited the church's widely popular web site. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o4QqGbQmU0

I guess you might say that this isn't being an anti-gay marriage activist, since he's not out there actively promoting it but simply speaking to his flock -- and whatever group of pastors he's going to send a note to.

But it certainly does constitute making a statement and giving an endorsement. What about that, Brother Rick? What about that, Larry King? What about holding this Man of God to the simple truth of his own words?

I admit that Rick Warren has done a lot of good humanitarian works and is cut from different cloth than Pat Robertson and James Dobson. But why lie? If you support Prop8, why pretend that you did nothing to help get it passed?

Ralph

Oh, that Joe Biden . . .

I'm glad Obama chose Joe Biden as his VP for several reasons, including especially today his colorful and uninhibited way of putting things.

After going after cheney for saying America is less safe under Obama, he recalled what he had said to george bush once about his foreign policy:

"I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office, and he was a great guy, enjoyed being with him. He said to me, he said, well, Joe, he said, I'm a leader. And I said, Mr. President, turn around and look behind you. No one's following. People are beginning to follow the United States again as a consequence of our administration."

You tell 'em, Joe.

Ralph

Obama in Iraq

Watching a video clip of Barack Obama greeting and being wildly cheered by our troops in Iraq today brought tears to my eyes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/07/obamas-iraq-visit-makes-s_n_183968.html

Here's a man whose fitness to be commander in chief was questioned during the campaign. How quickly all that has changed. Now everyone's talking about his calm command and his competence.

No doubt any president who comes to Iraq to visit the troops would get an enthusiastic response. But this felt different. It was genuine, it was enthusiastic, it was heart-warming.

george bush was a hale-fellow-well-met type who did a photo op carrying a display turkey on a big platter. But there was no respect for him.

This crowd exuded respect and affection. Someone yelled out "I love you !!"

Maybe I'm just biased and sentimental; but my tears were real.'

Ralph

And now there are four

Today, Vermont became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage and the first state to do it by a vote of the legislature rather than a court order. Both houses voted to override the Republican governor's veto, the Senate by 23-5 and the House by 100-49.

This decisive vote by elected representatives comes just four days after a unanimous Iowa court decision guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry in that heartland state.

So now Vermont and Iowa join Massachusetts and Connecticut. California will soon, finally, solidify its acceptance, even if the California Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of Prop8. A decision is expected by June; but it is looking likely that they will uphold it, since at least one of the justices, who voted for same-sex marriage before Prop8, seemed in the hearing to redefine the question now as 'taking away the people's right to amend the constitution' rather than 'fairness in the marriage law.'

If that is the outcome, it will be overturned by the voters. Another ballot initiative is already underway to reverse Prop8. The wording of the amendment has been approved and petition signatures can now be collected. Prop8 was passed by a last minute, multi-million dollar disinformation campaign, financed largely by out of state religious groups, after trailing in the polls as late as one month before the election.

Gay rights groups were caught unprepared for such a fight, but they are building solid support. Polls have already suggested that many people would change their vote after realizing what lies were spread by Prop8 proponents. The CA legislature has twice voted for same-sex marriage laws, only to be vetoed.

Winning two more states within a week gives a sense of momentum and encouragement to other states that are considering similar bills. New Hampshire's House of Representatives has already approved a gay marriage law; and bills have been introduced in at least eight other states: Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington.

It may be a while before any of them passes, but the governors of both NJ and NY are supporters. What a different feeling there is now than five years ago, when so many states passed constitutional amendments prohibiting gay marriage. At this point, anyway, this issue seems to have lost some of its clout as a political wedge issue for the moral conservatives.

Ralph