HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » An Urgent Message to Bern... » Reply #27

Response to ReRe (Reply #23)

Sun May 1, 2016, 06:14 PM

27. Thanks, because of your post I went and read all of it

and some of the background links too.

For example, this one:

Rearming for the apocalypse

AMERICANS ARE IN near-panic over the danger posed by Islamic terrorists. That danger, however, pales beside an emerging new one. President Obama has proposed a frighteningly wrongheaded plan to “modernize” our nuclear arsenal at the unfathomable cost of about $1 trillion over the next 30 years. Terror will never reach even 1 percent of our population. Nuclear “modernization” increases the prospect of true devastation.


Besides these grave dangers — global proliferation, accidental war, and nuclear terror — there is another: national bankruptcy. Obama’s project is ruinously expensive. Admiral Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calls it “spending ourselves into oblivion.”


Nuclear weapons are useful for deterrence only. The United States has more than enough for that purpose. Investing huge sums in a new arsenal will not protect us from tomorrow’s threats. Most depressing, the proposal for this investment comes from a president who campaigned on a pledge to reduce and seek to eliminate nuclear weapons — and who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his apparent sincerity. Keeping our country safe requires agile thinking, not reliance on policies shaped for a bygone age.

To respond to your post, I think the way to reach people, when campaigning, about the need to focus on domestic needs rather than the needs of empire, is to focus on the money. If the people of this country had someone pounding the military (and all its many associated agencies and costs) expenses into their heads, repeatedly and obstinately, they'd respond.

So why hasn't Bernie been pounding this message? I'm pretty sure he is fully on our side here, but has trimmed his messaging to a few targeted items that were chosen early in the campaign. Why? It might just be smart strategy on his part. Or it might be that he knows where the lines are, and doesn't want to be a martyr. I take heart from his debate statement, which he was ridiculed for, that the greatest security threat facing this nation is global climate change. Exactly right, he gets it.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 27 replies Author Time Post
Lodestar May 2016 OP
bkkyosemite May 2016 #1
LiberalArkie May 2016 #2
Triana May 2016 #3
zentrum May 2016 #7
dreamnightwind May 2016 #25
jtuck004 May 2016 #4
2banon May 2016 #5
Lodestar May 2016 #9
2banon May 2016 #13
ReRe May 2016 #21
AlbertCat May 2016 #15
2banon May 2016 #17
SalviaBlue May 2016 #6
cantbeserious May 2016 #8
BlancheSplanchnik May 2016 #10
TBF May 2016 #11
stopbush May 2016 #12
AlbertCat May 2016 #16
stopbush May 2016 #20
Nitram May 2016 #24
Katashi_itto May 2016 #14
baldguy May 2016 #18
oldandhappy May 2016 #19
djean111 May 2016 #26
Clifton May 2016 #22
ReRe May 2016 #23
LineLineNew Reply Thanks, because of your post I went and read all of it
dreamnightwind May 2016 #27
Please login to view edit histories.