From the Christian Science Monitor, August 5, 2005
Sunao Tsuboi was on the way to his university when he was surrounded by a sharp flash. In the next breath, he was blown more than 30 feet sideways in an explosion
Up to this point, I haven't really had a "dog in the race" for the Dem Presidential nomination. I've been waffling between Obama and Edwards, with Richardson lagging well behind. Although I was NOT planning on voting for Hillary, if she won the nomination I would vote for her.
After seeing Hillary and Dodd criticize Obama about his caution in using nuclear weapons against al Qaeda, however, I'm starting to warm to Obama.
I mean, nukes?!? We want our freakin' Presidential nominee to be open to using nukes?!? I'm stunned.
In the our entire world history, nuclear weapons have only been used twice, both by the same nation. The results were horrific:
I found myself lying on a sidewalk, enveloped in smoke and burnt from head to toe," says Mr. Tsuboi, who was less than a mile away from ground zero. "I thought I was going to die."
Here is a good place to learn about what we get into when we think about using a nuclear weapon. Here is a good place to go to hear about what happened the last time we dropped a nuclear weapon.
For a small but spread out target like al Qaeda (or some other terrorist group), nuclear weapons are excessive and unnecessary. That should just be a given, but if you need a reminder of the effects of a nuclear weapon, click here, here, here, and here. There's a reason why the aftermath is called a nuclear holocaust.
Again, I'm just stunned that Democrats and the MSM aren't thinking twice about using them. It all seems like political tactics, with nuclear weapons being just one more tool in the bag, one more piece to play in the freakin' game:
But [Tsuboi] fears that the 9/11 terrorist attacks on American cities could trigger another nuclear arms race, citing nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
"9/11 has changed everything," he says. "Since then, the US has even hinted at the use of nuclear weapons."
The Democrats are supposed to be the reasonable and serious people when it comes to fighting terrorism or getting out of Iraq. The MSM was supposed to have learned its lesson about mocking those candidates who weren't "serious" or "responsible" in their foreign policy positions (yeah, right). Yet here they are, hitting a candidate for vowing not to use nuclear weapons.
Nuclear weapons are supposed to be "on the table." In the eyes of the MSM and your fellow Democrats, if you're not willing to kill hundreds of thousands just to get a handful of jihadists, then you're not "serious" about your foreign policy.
My God. What have we gotten ourselves into?