Weak on Defense: Bush Dumps Arms Control Offices
Weak on Defense: Bush Dumps Arms Control Offices
Harvard specialist Graham Allison has noted that the “consensus in the national security community” is that “if policy makers in Washington keep doing what they are currently doing about the threat, a nuclear terrorist attack on America is likely to occur in the next decade.” Moreover, “if one lengthens the time frame, a nuclear strike is inevitable.”
But such warnings don’t seem to bother the White House. In a bit of grim irony, the Bush administration chose the 60th anniversary of the U.S. nuclear attack on Hiroshima to begin dismantling some of our bedrock nonproliferation efforts. This from the Global Security Newswire last week:
While Congress is on vacation, the Bush administration is planning to quietly eliminate most State Department arms control offices, phasing out senior positions and merging personnel and functions with nonproliferation and other units, according to a notification document sent to Congress.
What’s more, this phase-out isn’t an issue of funding. It’s actually the Bush administration’s strategy:
The changes, many of which could begin in less than two weeks, appear to reflect a determined shift by the administration away from decades of U.S. focus on promoting international arms control agreements toward ad hoc, less universal efforts to prevent the spread of restricted weapons to terrorists and certain regimes.
The ghost of John Bolton — champion of the ad hoc, “coalition of the willing” approach to nonproliferation — lives on.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
These people are certifiably insane.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:17 amThanks for the post, Nico. At a time when Americans should seriously engage in discussion about nuclear arms reduction, reforming NPT and strengthening Nunn-Lugar, this is YET another step backwards. Shame on us for not talking about this issue more often in the media. By moving backwards (bunker-busters, mini-nukes etc), we’re losing all our leverage to negotiate on NPT with both democratic AND rogue states.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:28 amThere are times to scream and this is one of those times! The house of cards better topple soon or this guessing game is going to greatly depress me!
August 8th, 2005 at 10:43 am> These people are certifiably insane.
Religiously insane. What drives them is they believe in the Rapture. Global warming? Global conflict? Raging epidemics? These are GOOD things from their point of view. These are pre-conditions for bringing on the Rapture.
Also the Jews in Israel. Ever wonder why all these right-wing “Christians” have such undying loyalty to Israel, when they have such obvious contempt for anyone not of their faith? Jews returning to Israel is one of the conditions for the Rapture.
For those that aren’t Rapturists, they know that violence spiraling out of control will cause people to vote for the “strong” party. If it gets good enough they can just declare martial law. From their point of view they can’t lose.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:43 amDarth,
We are talking about it in the only media we have. It’s the new media. How many people do you know who only get their news the way we do? Whenever the locals call me up with a subscription deal I tell them “no thank you”. “Why?”, they ask. I tell them I get all my news from blogs. I used to tell them I was blind and couldn’t read.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:47 amSadly, Alan, that is far more the case than not. I think it is a function of millenarianism, complicated by the timing of 9/11, which was intended, and will subside with time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascist
August 8th, 2005 at 10:52 amAlittle off subject, but Paul Hackett just contributed nicely on Diane Rehm. Talking about military.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:59 amdubya mouths the conservative christian stuff, but he certainly doesn’t live the words. He’s a fake christian. Either that or his god is so shallow and easily fooled that he doesn’t think it matters much to him & his.
Where am I going with this? Well, I have no doubt that there are those in bushco that DO want to do everything they can to bring on rapture. I just don’t believe that dumbya is one of them. i don’t believe king Chenney ( he is probably the real power here) is one of them either.
No, this is more about power and control for them. They think they can wind all the strings into their chosen guiding hands and make the marionettes dance their dance, & it’ll work out the way they want it to.
I beg to differ with their outlook. Just look at Iraq.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:14 amI agree, Narc. God bless the Blog, how else would people who work two jobs have time to stumble across obscure stories of interest?
For example, I would never have read about Editor & Publisher’s special report about the Hiroshima film cover-up, if some blogger hadn’t posted the link…
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000963439
August 8th, 2005 at 11:24 am#9 – Correct link:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001001583
August 8th, 2005 at 11:25 amkindness,
The word best describing Bush’s “christianess” is Pharisee. according to the New Testament in the Bible, Jesus speaks out against their brand of religious hypocricy often. BushCo and his followers must have gleened over that part, as well as most other teachings of Jesus, the “christ” root in the word “christian”.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:27 amThis is actually the ghost of Jesse Helms (or does he not really have a ghost yet.) He eliminated ACDA, in part to get rid of the Arms Control bureaus. They stayed on, for a few years in the State Department, but now they are gone, too. Helms always said, nonproliferation was OK, but not arms control. Bush agrees, as long as the nonproliferation is done with unilateral military action, but no multilateral negotiated regimes.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:29 amIt seems the method of nuclear non-proliferation BushCo has chosen is military, rather than diplomacy, not to mention secrecy.
Villagers, grab your pitchforks.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:31 amAnd torches.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:39 amBush agrees, as long as the nonproliferation is done with unilateral military action, but no multilateral negotiated regimes.
Huh?
August 8th, 2005 at 11:40 amA little Monday morning Chomsky for fellow anti-nuke activists…
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article303965.ece
August 8th, 2005 at 11:43 amWe have to feed the Military Industrial Complex more money, so they can build more WMD’s to sell to our enemies, so we can fight more wars.
Insanity – 3.
a. Extreme foolishness; folly.
b. Something that is extremely foolish.
Meanwhile here in America we have complete gun registration. Hmm…
“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent which will reach to himself.” –Thomas Paine
Amendment II
August 8th, 2005 at 12:30 pmA well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
60 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the country that dropped the bombs (which for complete disclosure’s sake, I agree with) is doing the most to destabilise and undermine any attempt to reduce the nuclear threat. See George Monbiot’s breakdown last week: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1540683,00.html
“If you have oil and aren’t developing a bomb (Iraq) you get invaded. If you have oil and are developing a bomb (Iran) you get threatened with invasion, but it probably won’t happen. If you don’t have oil, but have the bomb, the US representative will fly to your country and open negotiations. (North Korea)”
The world the Busheviks have created encourages nuclear proliferation, end of story.
August 8th, 2005 at 1:00 pmBush agrees, as long as the nonproliferation is done with unilateral military action, but no multilateral negotiated regimes.
Huh?
Comment by Narc  August 8, 2005 @ 11:40 am
Translation – Our enemies should reduce their weapons and we should increase ours.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:12 pmBush is doing the lock step with his extreme right-wing base, the super rich folks behind the current GOP assult on the America government. They are in power and intend to dismantle the government from the inside. These are folks that were or are supporting (members and founding membeers) the John Birch Society and the libertarians. Libertarians don’t any government and that fits in with the right-wing agenda. When the libertarians no longer needed the right-wing will dump them as part of the left.
Here in Paul Welrich’s handbook:
http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15483
*Still Engaged–But Outside of Politics*
It must be emphasized that this new movement will not be “disengaged” from the wider society, only “differently engaged.” We are, quite simply, replacing political activism with cultural activism as the center of our focus. And while the visibility of the new movement will be less pronounced than the existing (political) conservative movement in the short term, the seeds that we now sow will have dramatic repercussions over the long term. We have the capacity to fundamentally transform the face of American culture in the 21st century by following a different path, one built on the aggressive dissemination of our cultural values, rather than the idle hope that enough of our cultural values still remain in the body of the American people to carry us on to a few more isolated electoral victories.
We will never stop being engaged in the wider culture. We will not “hunker down” and wait for the storm to blow over. Our strategy will be to bleed this corrupt culture dry. We will pick off the most intelligent and creative individuals in our society, the individuals who help give credibility to the current regime. To do this, we will promote a set of beliefs more compelling than that of our opponents. We will launch a movement with more energy and more intensity than our opponents are capable of summoning. When the choice is made clear, the people–cultural elites and non-cultural elites alike–will vote with their feet by either joining or patronizing our institutions and abandoning those of the Left, and the reigning leftist regime will collapse from lack of support.
Our movement will be entirely destructive, and entirely constructive. We will not try to reform the existing institutions. We only intend to weaken them, and eventually destroy them. We will endeavor to knock our opponents off-balance and unsettle them at every opportunity. All of our constructive energies will be dedicated to the creation of our own institutions.
We will maintain a constant barrage of criticism against the Left. We will attack the very legitimacy of the Left. We will not give them a moment’s rest. We will endeavor to prove that the Left does not deserve to hold sway over the heart and mind of a single American. We will offer constant reminders that there is an alternative, there is a better way. When people have had enough of the sickness and decay of today’s American culture, they will be embraced by and welcomed into the New Traditionalist movement. The rejection of the existing society by the people will thus be accomplished by pushing them and pulling them simultaneously.
We will use guerrilla tactics to undermine the legitimacy of the dominant regime. We will take advantage of every available opportunity to spread the idea that there is something fundamentally wrong with the existing state of affairs.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:16 pmNarc only two percent of the popultion has any to do with blogs. That leave 98% that do not see what we see here in the blogs.
That 2% was posted in the last couple of days on another blog as a story.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:20 pmPaul Hackett today on Diane Rehm: (paraphrase)
-�critical� is the polite way of describing how officers describe Bush use of military.
-(Officers) don’t know what they are being “asked to accomplish� in Iraq, and don’t have a picture of the “end state�.
-It’s important to realize that Bush has made dissent unpatriotic.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:39 pmEasy,
August 8th, 2005 at 2:42 pmCNN does a blog segment.
John Stewart makes fun of CNN for doing blog segment.
I’d say there’s hope.
Also, Easy:
One of the topics for discussion today on Rehm was lagging support in military districts for Bush.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:45 pmBrian I agree there is hopw for the use of blogs and increased access by the general public.
I hope that lagging support in military districts includes the officer corp. If not only the gunts die not supporting the president while the discision makes sent them into combat underequiped and without the numbers needed to complete a bad mission.
If the officer corp does not speak up against Bush’s plans and failures them all the lagging support won’t stop these guys.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:02 pmI have some cousins that are so wraped up in this Christian support of Bush that I know they believe supporting Bush will bring on Rapture. No Shit.
I was included in all their emails about God.
I sent them the links to the extremists’ sites that are behind Bush. I included some of the statements these guys have made available on their sites.
Guess that pissed off the cousins. They have not sent me anything in two or three weeks now.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:07 pm#18 – terrytheturtle – you agree with the dropping of the bombs? Why?
– McGeorge Bundy confessed that he had pulled “a million lives saved” of thin air in order to justify the bombings (1947 Harper’s magazine essay).
– Oppenheimer said we dropped the bombs on “an essentially defeated enemy.”
– President Truman and his closest advisor, Secretary of State James Byrnes, quite plainly used it primarily to prevent the Soviets from sharing in the occupation of Japan. And they used it on Aug. 6 even though they had agreed among themselves as they returned home from the Potsdam Conference on Aug. 3 that the Japanese were looking for peace.
– The event that had the most to do with that ultimate surrender was the Soviet Union declaring war on Japan on August 8, two days after the Hiroshima blast, argues Professor Tsuyoshi Hasegawa in a new book entitled “Racing the Enemy”
And even if you turn your face away from all this and believe that Hiroshima was “useful”, there’s no way you can argue that Nagasaki was just sadistic.
Why is this relevant today? Because it underlines how easy it is for FEAR to escalate events even in a democracy with an otherwise intelligent citizenry.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:23 pm#28 – I meant to say “anything but sadistic”
August 8th, 2005 at 3:24 pmI got ‘em too, Easy. I had to tell my whole family: “No more Jesus email”.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:31 pmI lost my best friend, also, because of the awoken giant.
Translation – Our enemies should reduce their weapons and we should increase ours.
Comment by Carlton  August 8, 2005 @ 2:12 pm
Thanks, Carlton.
I’m no pacifist, and more of a hawk than most here, I’d bet, but I’m closer to an Eisenhowerian conservative than any conservative Republican can claim today. They would say I was too liberal. John Birchers call Ike a commie back then. They were convinced he was.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:47 pmEisenhower was the last decent republican president that the party of Lincoln could be proud of and at least identify. I use the rest to scare my kids to behave at bedtime.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:49 pm“John Birchers call Ike a commie back then. They were convinced he was.”
To someone in the radical right, anyone that talks about fairness, justice or compassion is a commie. Ironically they always want those very attributes applied to them anytime ‘taxes’ or ‘responsibility’ are involved. It’s not that they disagree with welfare or subsidies, they just don’t believe poor people or minorities should receive them. To a fascist loonie – the only good welfare is corporate welfare…
August 8th, 2005 at 4:08 pmYes he was, Terry. Even Goldwater mellowed with age… or soured on the the theocrats:
From Not Your Father’s America
http://carapace.weblogs.us/archives/026843.html
The man Republicans lionized as a wellspring of conservative wisdom and scourge of government tyranny saw it coming.
Beware, Sen. Barry Goldwater warned: the country is being pushed into a theocracy by overbearing religious extremists who’ll suffocate individual freedom.
Did Goldwater, who died in 1998, foresee the sort of politicians and “religious” fanatics who turned Terri Schiavo’s tragedy into a circus?
Listen to what he had to say decades ago:
· “The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.”
· “I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C,’ and ‘D.’ Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?”
· “And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of ‘conservatism.’”
· “When you say ‘radical right’ today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party away from the Republican Party, and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye.”
Foretelling things to come, televangelist-politician Pat Robertson wrote in 1991, “By the end of this decade control of the major institutions of society will be firmly in the hands of those who share a pro-family, religious, traditional value perspective.”
Nine years later, George W. Bush was president. Stem cell research banned. Evolution discredited in education. PBS browbeaten by “moral values” Education secretary William J. Bennett. Broadcast language policed. Sex education textbooks censored to include only abstinence. Aid to foreign agencies involved in abortion cancelled. The Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives created. The Justice Department forms the “religious rights” unit. Attacks launched on same-sex marriage. Pharmacists refuse to fill birth control prescriptions.
Coming soon: hand picked “moral values” judges to enforce America’s conservative political pact with religion.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:09 pmMore here:
http://www.theocracywatch.org/taking_over.htm
And I agree with Obvious, obviously, 100%
August 8th, 2005 at 4:12 pmDon’t know if you are familiar with this, Terry. If you are, now you know it’s authentic. If not, you will get a kick out of it.
http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/presidential-papers/first-term/documents/1147.cfm
August 8th, 2005 at 4:14 pmEisenhower was a communist.
You keep harping on the Constitution; I should like to point out that the meaning of the Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is. Consequently no powers are exercised by the Federal government except where such exercise is approved by the Supreme Court (lawyers) of the land.2
I admit that the Supreme Court has in the past made certain decisions in this general field that have been astonishing to me. A recent case in point was the decision in the Phillips case.3 Others, and older ones, involved “interstate commerce.”4 But until some future Supreme Court decision denies the right and responsibility of the Federal government to do certain things, you cannot possibly remove them from the political activities of the Federal government.
Now it is true that I believe this country is following a dangerous trend when it permits too great a degree of centralization of governmental functions. I oppose this–in some instances the fight is a rather desperate one. But to attain any success it is quite clear that the Federal government cannot avoid or escape responsibilities which the mass of the people firmly believe should be undertaken by it. The political processes of our country are such that if a rule of reason is not applied in this effort, we will lose everything–even to a possible and drastic change in the Constitution. This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon “moderation” in government. Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas.5 Their number is negligible and they are stupid.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:17 pmWell, if he was… so am I.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:17 pmNarc #36: I enjoyed that, I’ve seen clips of it before but not the whole. Of course this innocuous looking paragraph stands out to me now: “A year ago last January we were in imminent danger of losing Iran, and sixty percent of the known oil reserves of the world.7 You may have forgotten this. Lots of people have. But there has been no greater threat that has in recent years overhung the free world. That threat has been largely, if not totally, removed. I could name at least a half dozen other spots of the same character.” Ah, yes, “All the Shah’s men.”
August 8th, 2005 at 4:52 pmAnd with acknowledgements to Kirk Douglas:
“I’m a commie”
“No, I’m a commie”
August 8th, 2005 at 4:55 pmI feel like we are existing in a surreal world. When we should be advocating the limitation of arms proliferation, Bush& Co. are quietly undermining efforts. I am beginning to believe that those nut cases who climb to mountaintops to await the imminent rapture are on to something. They think like Bush!
August 8th, 2005 at 6:11 pm#4, Alan,
August 8th, 2005 at 6:14 pmYou might be right.
#36 Narc,
August 8th, 2005 at 6:44 pmWhat a great quote you found. Thanks. I never realized Ike was so astute.
What’s next for the Right? I’m picturing a new bumper sticker:
“Arms Control means hitting the right city with your ICBM”
August 8th, 2005 at 7:25 pmI just recently found this feed and just want to say I appreciate all your comments and opinions, it has been eye-opening for me.
I don’t watch tv news anymore, I don’t trust who’s behind it. So I prefer to get my “news” from blogs as well- a much more balanced medium.
Thanks again
August 8th, 2005 at 7:30 pm“Bush agrees, as long as the nonproliferation is done with unilateral military action, but no multilateral negotiated regimes.
Huh?
Comment by Narc  August 8, 2005 @ 11:40 am
Translation – Our enemies should reduce their weapons and we should increase ours.
Comment by Carlton  August 8, 2005 @ 2:12 pm”
Actually, what I meant was that the Bush Admin’s nonproliferation policy relies on military force and regime change (i.e. Iraq) rather than diplomacy and multilateral agreements such as the NPT, BWC, and CWC. Just witness the lack of support it gave to the NPT review conferencein May. And the torpedo it shot at the BWC. Its a huge change in U.S. policy.
But Carlton’s translation works for me, too.
August 8th, 2005 at 8:24 pmSo the burns on nonproliferation agents might have to do with more than pique at having Iraq lies exposed, eh?
August 10th, 2005 at 8:17 amSpeaking of “weak on defense,” DoD documents now confirm that Clinton Admin layers prevented dissemination of information about Mohammed Atta and other al Qaeda members known to be in the U.S. in 1999 and 2000. Something about the “Gorelick Wall” preventing sharing of info about people here on visas.
9/11 Commission staffers were briefed on this issue, but Commission staff never gave the information to the Commissioners themselves. Commissioner Gorelick has so far declined to comment . . .
August 10th, 2005 at 2:48 pm[...] highlighted news that the Bush administration “planning to quietly eliminate most State Department arms control offices” during the August recess. Good news: the restructuring is now (temporarily) on hold. 2:36 pm | Comment (0) [...]
August 18th, 2005 at 2:36 pmWhat I don’t understand is why have we not done much of anything about 9/11? Iraq is obviously a pet project of the NeoCons from before 9/11. Afghanistan was a joke and didnt even get Osama. We all know the history of how AlQaeda came into being and who is supporting them. We know that the two main countries supporting Osama is 1) Saudi Arabia ..where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from and where much $$$ support and moral support comes from. 2) Pakistan was/is used as the training grounds and weapons funneling system for Osama. This has been true since the war against the soviet union. In addition it is now public fact that the Pakistan military and Nuke scientists have been proliferating WMDs to Iran, Lybia, hell maybe even Osama. Recently Pakistan tested a cruise missle capable of carrying nukes.
I remember jumping to my feet on 9/11 when I saw the second plane hit and shouted war…which awoke my kids and scared my wife in to crying. We sat there all day saying this is going to be just like WWII which we both saw alot of since I like watching stuff about WWII on TV. We thought Bush was going to do what FDR did. An all or nothing war against those that were behind this. Bush was in the pocket of the people that did this. And the Democrats have not walked up to the plate and demanded that we stop Pakistan from getting the ICBMs that could wipe us out. The Democrats did not demand Justice against the Saudis. Instead the Democrats just complain about what Bush is doing. Are they planing on attacking Pakistan and Saudi Arabia after they get in power or are they just going to let 9/11 slide?
August 22nd, 2005 at 12:36 pmEven as Bush makes the world more dangerous, he uses fear to sell his presidency to the public.
From You can’t call it terror if you’re not afraid of it.
…All the latest commotion was conveniently foreshadowed by the President a day earlier in a “major speech†on terror. It was a real stemwinder. I have the Cliff notes.
Bush said: “9-11…terror…assaulted by enemies…great evil…covered in smoke and ashes…fire across the Potomac…new terror offensive…kill children and the elderly…mortal danger to all humanity…like a parasite…as brutal an enemy as we’ve ever faced.†It’s the same pep talk he gives every time his polls plummet.
Doesn’t it seem odd that a President who conducts foreign policy like he’s trying to get in touch with his inner-cowboy would be so intent on turning his own country into a herd of spooked sheep?
But with Karl Rove curled up into a fetal ball awaiting the word of a certain grand jury, and the rest of the team either fending off the FBI or dusting off their curricula vitae, Bush is kind of on his own. So he’s playing the hole card, the only thing that’s ever worked for him. Be very, very afraid.
Terrorists, hurricanes, bio-agents, wild fires, housing bubbles, social insecurity, gay people getting married, be very, very afraid.
Now Bush is squawking about a military takeover when the Avian flu pandemic hits. How bad is it when we’re afraid of chickens?…
full article
October 11th, 2005 at 11:31 amFree Verizon Ringtones…
Free Verizon Ringtones…
January 18th, 2006 at 5:21 pm