…the president of France makes more sense on national security than the president of the United States.
Why this comment on The Corner? Because of this statement of reason by French President Sarkozy today.
WASHINGTON – France will not give up nuclear weapons because doing so would “jeopardise” its security, President Nicolas Sarkozy said this morning as global leaders gathered for a summit on nuclear security.
“I cannot jeopardise the security and safety of my country,” Sarkozy told CBS News here hours before US President Barack Obama opened the landmark summit of 47 nations in Washington.
The French leader said he could not abandon his nation’s nuclear weapons programme “on a unilateral basis in a world as dangerous as the one in which we live today”.
The Corner reader added to Jonah Goldberg that, “Sarkozy’s announcement on nukes demonstrates that we’ve crossed some sort of line, and not a good one.”
Obama is no Reagan.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
“you k now we are in trouble when” …. the usually reliable liberal Washington Post starts comparing the Obama press handling to Soviet and Red China style media clampdowns.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041303067_pf.html
Surprised??
Obama is the ANTI-Reagan; systematically trying to undo everything Reagan did that made the last 30 years the most prosperous (across the board) in American history.
“you know we’re in trouble”….when President Obama says his nuclear summit with 47 nations makes the USA and the world safer. While he is completely inept in dealing with the nukes in Iran and N Korea.
Considering even with our reduced nuclear arms, we will have way more than France…I’m not sure how the statement is comparable. We still have more than enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world a few times over.
I’m with Dark on this.
And go back to Sarkozy’s address to Congress. You know it’s bad when a French guy loves America more than our own liberals.
Maybe we should ask the French President to move here and run in 2012
So wait, did Obama say he was going to give up the United States nuclear arsenal?
I’ve never heard him say that. I’ve heard him say that we wouldn’t use nuclear weapons in a first strike against countries that follow the non-proliferation treaty (which means there is an exception for countries like North Korea and Iran.)
And regardless, does the idea of launching a first strike nuclear attack against anyone really make sense to Republicans? Because that is totally insane..
we wouldn’t use nuclear weapons in a first strike against countries that follow the non-proliferation treaty
So he only gave Russia and China the green light to invade their neighbors, that’s all. I don’t see how that is better, their neighbors have legitimate fears of Russian and Chinese imperial designs, and many years of history to back it up.
Or if they use the BC part of NBC…
But hey, LEvi would list China and Russia as successful communist nations I’m sure, if he ever backed up his statements.