|
|
May 25, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Live Chat: Robert Scheer on Nuclear WeaponsPosted on Apr 8, 2010If you missed Robert Scheer discussing his column, nuclear weapons and President Obama with readers or you just want to relive the excitement, you can read a full transcript right here. This chat was held the afternoon of April 8th, 2010. 3:00 Truthdig Welcome to our live chat, let's get started  3:01 Robert Scheer Hello. 3:03 Robert ScheerWe seem to be having some technical difficulties, one sec... 3:05 Question From Douglas Many advocates of nuclear energy, now even on the left, disclaim any connection with nuclear weaponry proliferation. What do you think, and is a consensus developing or disintegrating on this issue? 3:05 Robert ScheerI'm torn on that issue 3:05 Robert ScheerI happened to be able to visit and report on chernobyl (spelling?) one year after the disaster. 3:06 Robert Scheerand witnessed the incredible confusion, even at that late date, as to how to handle the crisis -- what had caused it. So I don't want to underestimate any of the dangers. 3:07 Robert ScheerHowever there is a fundamental difference between the attempt to develop peaceful usages of atomic power and the deliberate development of nuclear warfighting capabilities. 3:07 Question From Monsiuer Bronx Tell me, Mr. Scheer, why we need so many nuclear bombs? How about we just have the ones on the nuclear sub fleet and drop all the rest? 3:07 Robert ScheerYes! 3:07 Robert ScheerObviously a correct suggestion, but the point is how to we get not only there but to the ultimate abolition of these horrid implements. 3:08 Question From Douglas Wait!! Drop all the rest?! 3:08 Robert ScheerThe problem is a political one 3:08 Robert Scheerwe have been ignoring this issue for half a century basically 3:08 Robert Scheerand even the minor agreements that have been developed during the cold war have collapsed 3:09 Robert Scheerwe still don't have a test ban treaty agreement 3:09 Robert Scheerwe needed a new START agreement 3:09 Robert Scheerand Obama has accomplished something very important, which is putting the nuclear weapons issue back on the front burner. 3:09 Robert ScheerWhat he has negotiated with the Russians is a modest step in that both sides are still left with many more weapons than are needed to destroy all life on the planet. 3:10 Robert Scheerbut we're moving in the right direction. 3:10 Robert ScheerThe real issue now is whether the senate will affirm this and that is highly questionable. So instead of arguing about better proposals we should be working to get this one approved. 3:10 Question From Billy B. Is there a stated goal of the Obama admin re nuclear drawdown...is he fulfilling a campaign promise with this treaty? 3:11 Robert ScheerYes. as well as the promise he made in his Prague speech last April. 3:11 Robert ScheerA 1/3 cut in the strategic arsenal of both Russia and the US is a major step forward. As well as moves to cut the delivery systems. And end MIRVing of weapons 3:12 Question From Billy B. Are you at all surprised by the right's attempt to villify even this??? 3:12 Robert ScheerI'm not surprised. Given what has happened in the last year. But I am appalled. I mean how in the world can one justify being opposed to getting the russians to have fewer nuclear weapons and yet call yourself a conservative. 3:13 TruthdigA question from a reader submitted ahead of time has come in: John, New York says: Clearly reversing the development of nuclear weapons has been in progress for some years, but from an strategic defense point of view? What do you think the outcome of this policy is going to be in light of a nuclear threat, what is our leverage power and how can we even guarantee a strong retaliation let alone a successful one? 3:15 Robert ScheerAs the president pointed out, our retaliatory power now is designed to combat an enemy that no longer exists, namely the Soviet Union. We have to recognize that nuclear weapons are lousy weapons that cannot differentiate between a military target and the surrounding population. That is what happened, even with a very small weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
1
2
3
4
NEXT PAGE >>>
 TAGS:
|
A Cooler Century? Wait and See
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Leefeller, April 11, 2010 at 8:52 pm Link to this comment
I read the four pages of transcript and it was not so bad, maybe I am a fast reader?
In the thread on Robert Sheers article this week, the gloom and doom crowd is doing their song and dance routine about Obama not doing enough about Nuclear proliferation, like Sheer stated, this is a start in the right direction.
What will the topic be next week?
Report thisBy erichwwk, April 10, 2010 at 7:02 pm Link to this comment
I was disappointed that no one raised the issue of whether this START was used to justify the new capacity infrastructure at Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, and Kansas City. To many of us the warhead reductions, while useful in drawing attention to the nuclear weapons issue, has a serious downside in that acyally capacity to develop NEW nuclear weapons has actuallt been significantly increased under Obama. See eg
http://www.lasg.org/press/2010/press_release_7Apr2010.html
and
http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/nuclear-weapons-the-modernization-myth
and
http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/04/06/nuclear_posture_review_or_nuclear_public_relations
Report thisBy rollzone, April 9, 2010 at 5:05 pm Link to this comment
hello. we discovered nuclear weaponry. we developed nuclear energy. from a safety standpoint- both bad ideas. eliminate them. nobody needs them. nobody has to use them. put the technology in the vault alongside free energy, and forgettabouttit. turn the page in nuclear history. the end. no political games- eliminate all of it. it will be a good loss. we do not need it. lesson learned.
Report thisBy omop, April 9, 2010 at 9:57 am Link to this comment
This subject matter falls within the “halo” of a sisyphusian discussion.
To get, say a state like Israel who is reported to have nuclear weapons to agree
to a modus vivendi with Japan, or Syria or Iran or Pakistan or Russia is an
exercise in futility.
If the intent is to minimize the use of nuclear weapons then by an international
agreement each member state of the UN should be allowed to have a minimum
of half a dozen nuclear bombs made at their disposal to be used when ever they
deem it appropriate.
If no one can agree on just plain military hardware, like helicopters, missiles,
cluster bombs, what is the rational for ” an agreement on nuclear weapons”.
As basically “animals” when one know that every one else has an equal
potential of causing havoc the chances [ hopefully ] of using one are diminshed
considerably.
At the present the socalled “mad dog” posture of the Israelis to wipe out
everyone including several capitals in Europe according to their military expert
Martin Van Cleveld why should not the Italians, Greeks, Turkey, Poland et al not
have an equal capability?
A curse and a blessing for some.
Report thisBy ofersince72, April 9, 2010 at 9:37 am Link to this comment
There is nothing new ...with this…
The same line of crap we have heard forever
Report thisThats all we during Cinton years….
Iran and North Korea…we might nuk you!!!
So they are getting rid of their old , obsolete nuks
and replacing them with more conventional weapon..
WOW, were are still the poorest nation in the world
world’s largest debtor nation gobbling up every penny
we can borrow to build more destruction to kill a
boggyman that doesn’t exist making a few extremly
wealthy while we rot our country and the minds of its
citizens.
By ron_woodward, April 9, 2010 at 7:24 am Link to this comment
Nobody in the Middle East will take the USA seriously until she prosecutes her officials for selling US nuclear secrets to potential enemies.
Report thisAt least a year ago Israel developed an attack plan to take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities with conventional weapons. There is no need to nuke an entire population to disarm them.
Bob Scheer is correct that nukes guarantee self-destruction.
In this regard anyone who votes against ratification of the POTUS treaty should be tried for Sedition.
By Ouroborus, April 9, 2010 at 6:20 am Link to this comment
So, where’s the Mp3 of the live chat; I’m not reading
Report thisthrough 4 pages of transcripts!
By gerard, April 8, 2010 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment
To reinforce the motivation for getting rid of nuclear weapons, and previous to the Senate sessions on the subject (which are bound to be nasty), please consider engaging the opinions of someone who knows first-hand about the actual human, painful, extensive, long-lasting suffering caused by the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. With the passage of time, the horror has rather “worn off” for people who didn’t experience it, and it needs to be reiterated in no uncertain terms. If anyone has the contacts to do it, a video of film at the time, (or a slide show) on YouTube would be a good idea, too.
Report this