Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Rudd and his Nuclear Non-Proliferations and Disarmament Commission

"You know as eerie as this may sound, atomic devices probably saved the planet from a third and even fourth major world conflict."

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has announced the creation of a new international body that will push for nuclear disarmament. Mr Rudd says Australia will set up a body to be known as the Nuclear Non-Proliferations and Disarmament Commission. Read the rest here ...

You know as eerie as this may sound, atomic devices probably saved the planet from a third or even fourth major world conflict. It is simple really, nuclear arsenals are extremely potent weapons, thus there deployment was essential in order to threaten an enemy (think Soviet Union) so at to prevent the use of the same weaponry. My friends, it was known as nuclear deterrence, a military doctrine also known as Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD, and it worked.

Moreover, here is Andrew Bolt’s way of viewing it, “with one bomb, the Allies averted countless more deaths. Without the atomic bomb, how many more American soldiers and Japanese civilians would have died? And without the bomb, what more would the Soviet Union have dared?”

Anyone with some historical knowledge can tell you that reduced aggregate casualties due to the atomic bomb are fact.

Back to the newly proposed commission (another word for committee!), dare I say it, but the odds of success, to rid the globe of nuclear weapons are, zero and none.

I was also drawn to a certain Warwick A’s comments on Bolt’s blog, “Next he’ll visit Sandarkan and demand “a fair days pay for a fair days work” and then lobby to establish an International Railworker’s Union.”

Another commission aye, is Mr. Rudd an out of control egomaniac?

Our Prime Minister is a commitee freak, see also:
A committee set up every four hours by Rudd team, and Art of government lost as committees multiply


Americaneocon said...

Nice blog, and blogging, Otto!!

Zach said...

Does deterrence work against non-state, terrorist groups? Or as many military minds and statesmen around the world have concluded, is deterrence now irrelevant and we should all work toward a nuclear-free world? Or by your logic, should every state have nuclear weapons so we have even less war?



Anonymous said...