Obama recently signed a treaty with Russia beginning the process of the reduction of nuclear weapons. On one side, there's indeed an argument to be made about how many stockpiles does one nation need? Surely the U.S. can afford to cut military spending a little and still maintain the most powerful army in the world, no? They can focus on maintaining and improving equipment and technologies without necessarily adding to the point the military budget is the largest component of GDP. On the other hand, what if it begins a process of reducing the American military into disrepair? Moreover, what does such a treaty signal to more hostile nations who have aquired and will aquire a nuclear arsenal?
The vision of a world free of nuclear weapons is noble but breathtakingly naive. As long as pride, pugnacity and the need to war for resources and other vices humans still posess, war will remain a part of our nature and the ultimate arbitrator for some time to come. Obama is probably calculating American morality must lead the way on this front. I doubt China, Russia and even more so, North Korea, Iran and Pakistan will share America's visions. The world of eternal peace is thousands of years away I reckon - if at all.
Canada has taken the naive, if not foolish path to reducing its army to the point we can't defend ourselves effectively. We have a capable and stellar army but it's too small relative to our land mass.
To the pacifist, there's no need for one because "no one wants to attack Canada." While this may be true at the moment, things can change. It's unfortunate Canada is incapable of defending its borders and interests. Look at it this way. People work out to keep in shape. You don't want your muscles to weaken. It's no different with a country. It's prudent and wise "in case." Alas, Canada chose an "Obama-esque" and "Wilsonian" route. The irony of course, for a country excessively proud as Canada, should the time come (heaven forbid) we need to defend ourselves, it will be the Americans who will do it. So much for our sovereignty.
Yes, God forbid Canada does have to defend itself from anyone. The U.S. will surely come to Canada's defense at a great cost to both nations if necessary. Frankly there seems to be no alternative to this scenario either.
ReplyDeleteHave you guys considered becoming part of France again? They have some nukes too.
France? I hope you're kidding.
ReplyDeleteThe more I ponder this treaty Obama signed the more I realize it's foolish.
It was part of France when my ancestors lived there.
ReplyDeleteNew France was which is a part of Quebec and then the French abandoned it. As Voltaire said, what's to be done with such a barren land? Or something to that effect. The British built Quebec's economy.
ReplyDeleteI love France. Like I do Italy. But I wouldn't join either.