Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Welcome to the new Young Americans for Liberty! Learn about the new features or give us your feedback!

Apr 14, 2010 at 5:05 PM

By Matt Ciepielowski

chaaaaaaaaaaaaange In a move that should surprise no one, President Obama took a page from the Bush playbook at the recent Nuclear Security Summit, and told us all we should be very, very scared of terrorists getting nuclear weapons.

According to Obama, "the risk of a nuclear confrontation between nations has gone down, but the risk of nuclear attack has gone up."

But in the Washington Times article, a member of the congressional Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism claims otherwise-

We were given briefings and when we tried to find specific intelligence on the threat of any known terrorist efforts to get a bomb, the answer was we did not have any.

Thank God America voted for change, right?

More YAL coverage of the summit by Roy Antoun here.

Posted in:

Blog Policy
Login or register to post comments

C'mon dude, didn't you get the memo? Only nation-states can provide international stability.

Seriously though, you can definitely see the undertones of the nation-state system essentially declaring war on anyone who refuses to join their club.

Submitted by Elliot Engstrom on April 14, 2010.

"But in the Washington Times article..."

....a variety of views are expressed, not just the one you quoted. For example:

"Graham Allison, a Harvard professor and author of a book on nuclear terrorism, said he agrees with the president that the threat is growing, based on North Korea's nuclear proliferation to Syria and instability in nuclear-armed Pakistan."

And even if the administration is exaggerating the threat, the article suggests it is not for the reasons that Bush did so, that is, to invade another country. Rather it is to increase the sentiment that reducing nuke numbers is a good thing for us all. That's a quite a different picture from what this post presents.