Critics say Republican budget cuts could cause 'nuke terror attack'

Monte Kuligowski
Well, the Republicans are winning the public opinion battle on budget reform and spending cuts from Wisconsin to Washington. So what's the Obama media to do about that?

How about a news story titled, "Budget cuts could increase risk of nuke terror attack," for starters? I'm not making that up. The story is by Zachary Roth writing for "The Lookout" of Yahoo! News.

Roth opens his piece with, "Last April, President Obama hosted an unprecedented Washington gathering of representatives from 47 nations, to discuss what he described as ‘the single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and long-term'--the prospect of a terrorist group acquiring a nuclear weapon."

Wow, "an unprecedented" gathering -- that Obama, he's really something. Of course, no one with any commonsense needs 47 nations to realize that terrorists with nuclear weapons pose the "biggest" threat to national security. Apparently Roth believes Obama is quite a genius to have come to such a profound conclusion.

Okay, now that Roth has established that Obama knows that terrorists with nukes are very dangerous, it's time talk about how Obama plans on preventing that from happening. Obama is trapped in the eighties when he and his Marxist professor friends dreamed of nuclear nonproliferation. You know, during the Cold War when there were only two countries with nuclear capability.

Today, Obama apparently believes that agreements with Russia and China to disarm will keep nukes out of the hands of terrorists. As Russia and China hoodwink Obama and as Iran and North Korea push full steam ahead in nuclear proliferation that somehow should work out for our security interests. "But," Roth observes:

proposed budget cuts could badly hamper America's ability to counter that threat. Nuclear-security experts are expressing alarm about the potential impact of steep cuts to the country's nuclear nonproliferation program--as well as intense frustration at what they see as the White House's failure so far to push back against the cuts. Critics say rolling back nonproliferation funding could undermine a cornerstone of Obama's foreign-policy agenda.

That last sentence is a gem as it sadly reveals how Obama plans on keeping us safe: through his policy of disarmament. So, making us weaker as the rogue terrorist states grow stronger is the plan. But it's Obama's plan, so it must be brilliant!

"The budget passed last week by the House of Representatives cut total funding for nuclear security programs [nonproliferation] by more than $600 million," laments Roth. And no story would be complete without experts who "say." "Experts say" that the proposed cuts would make it more likely that terrorists will acquire nuclear weapons. Roth even dropped a name: Jim Walsh of MIT's Security Studies Program says so.

As laughable as the conclusion of the liberal "expert" is -- that terrorists are more likely to get nukes if we can't disarm -- the readers of Roth's piece are supposed to suddenly support "the cornerstone of Obama's foreign policy agenda."

Well, the President of France, Nicholas Sarkozy had to listen to Obama's idealism on "nuclear abolition" at a UN Security Council meeting in 2009. Alex Spillius records Sarkozy's words, writing for The Telegraph:

"We live in a real world not a virtual world," the Frenchman told the 15-member council. "And the real world expects us to take decisions.

"President Obama dreams of a world without weapons ... but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.

"Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993.

"I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map," he continued, referring to Israel.

The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr. Obama's resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy.

"If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons," he said. Mr. Sarkozy has previously called the US president's disarmament crusade "naïve."

We may safely say that readers who believe Roth's scare tactics are equally naïve.

 

Well, the Republicans are winning the public opinion battle on budget reform and spending cuts from Wisconsin to Washington. So what's the Obama media to do about that?

How about a news story titled, "Budget cuts could increase risk of nuke terror attack," for starters? I'm not making that up. The story is by Zachary Roth writing for "The Lookout" of Yahoo! News.

Roth opens his piece with, "Last April, President Obama hosted an unprecedented Washington gathering of representatives from 47 nations, to discuss what he described as ‘the single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and long-term'--the prospect of a terrorist group acquiring a nuclear weapon."

Wow, "an unprecedented" gathering -- that Obama, he's really something. Of course, no one with any commonsense needs 47 nations to realize that terrorists with nuclear weapons pose the "biggest" threat to national security. Apparently Roth believes Obama is quite a genius to have come to such a profound conclusion.

Okay, now that Roth has established that Obama knows that terrorists with nukes are very dangerous, it's time talk about how Obama plans on preventing that from happening. Obama is trapped in the eighties when he and his Marxist professor friends dreamed of nuclear nonproliferation. You know, during the Cold War when there were only two countries with nuclear capability.

Today, Obama apparently believes that agreements with Russia and China to disarm will keep nukes out of the hands of terrorists. As Russia and China hoodwink Obama and as Iran and North Korea push full steam ahead in nuclear proliferation that somehow should work out for our security interests. "But," Roth observes:

proposed budget cuts could badly hamper America's ability to counter that threat. Nuclear-security experts are expressing alarm about the potential impact of steep cuts to the country's nuclear nonproliferation program--as well as intense frustration at what they see as the White House's failure so far to push back against the cuts. Critics say rolling back nonproliferation funding could undermine a cornerstone of Obama's foreign-policy agenda.

That last sentence is a gem as it sadly reveals how Obama plans on keeping us safe: through his policy of disarmament. So, making us weaker as the rogue terrorist states grow stronger is the plan. But it's Obama's plan, so it must be brilliant!

"The budget passed last week by the House of Representatives cut total funding for nuclear security programs [nonproliferation] by more than $600 million," laments Roth. And no story would be complete without experts who "say." "Experts say" that the proposed cuts would make it more likely that terrorists will acquire nuclear weapons. Roth even dropped a name: Jim Walsh of MIT's Security Studies Program says so.

As laughable as the conclusion of the liberal "expert" is -- that terrorists are more likely to get nukes if we can't disarm -- the readers of Roth's piece are supposed to suddenly support "the cornerstone of Obama's foreign policy agenda."

Well, the President of France, Nicholas Sarkozy had to listen to Obama's idealism on "nuclear abolition" at a UN Security Council meeting in 2009. Alex Spillius records Sarkozy's words, writing for The Telegraph:

"We live in a real world not a virtual world," the Frenchman told the 15-member council. "And the real world expects us to take decisions.

"President Obama dreams of a world without weapons ... but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.

"Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993.

"I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map," he continued, referring to Israel.

The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr. Obama's resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy.

"If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons," he said. Mr. Sarkozy has previously called the US president's disarmament crusade "naïve."

We may safely say that readers who believe Roth's scare tactics are equally naïve.