It’s not the weapon I worry about; it’s those behind the weapon that must be contained. You know, the ones able to pull the trigger.
It turns out Russia is ready to fire nuclear weapons pre-emptively – meaning, they will nuke someone who appears aggressive or is a threat to them before they can even attack.
Doesn’t that just give you the warm-fuzzies?
Russia is weighing changes to its military doctrine that would allow for a “preventive” nuclear strike against its enemies — even those armed only with conventional weapons.
The news comes just as American diplomats are trying to get Russia to cut down its nuclear stockpile, and put the squeeze on Iran’s suspect nuclear program.
Here’s my question: How do they define the term, “Aggressors.”
If Russia labels a nation an aggressor as quickly as the Left in America labels someone a racist, we could be in for some serious fireworks.
As if this isn’t scary enough, Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of the Kremlin’s security council, left-open the door to even bomb local targets within or near Russia:
What’s more, Patrushev said, Russia is revising the rules for the employment of nukes to repel conventionally armed attackers, “not only in large-scale, but also in a regional and even a local war…In critical national security situations, one should also not exclude a preventive nuclear strike against the aggressor.”
As the author puts it, “If I were in Georgia — or in any other country Russia considers part of its sphere of influence — that formulation would make me pretty anxious.”
Bringing it back home, hasn’t Barack Hussein Obama held dialogues with Russia in an attempt to have them reduce their nuclear weapons? I don’t think this was on his agenda. He’s even having trouble coaxing Russia into Iranian sanctions (yet again).
It’s not too late to re-think that Nobel Peace Prize 😉