Happy Halloween Mr. Vice President: Let Every Country Have a Nuclear Weapon
Wendy Liu
October 31, 2007
With all saints or spirits knocking on our doors this Halloween night, I imagine the mask Vice President Dick Cheney is most scared to see on his porch would be that of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian President.
A few days ago, Mr. Cheney severely declared, “We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” I am not sure if he succeeded in scaring the Iranians by hinting American military attack or Americans with yet another imagined mushroom cloud from yet another cache of phantom nuclear weapons. I am sure, however, he sounded scared. I wonder why. I wondered four years ago when Mr. Cheney was scared in the same way.
I guess there are two things I can’t figure out.
One. I do not follow the logic that a sole superpower is so scared of a small country. Picture it: you are the richest and biggest guy in town, with the grandest and strongest mansion, and most importantly, the best security system. Yet you are so scared of a poor and short guy across the town that you want to him dead because he dreams of having your kind of security or just tries to find out how it works.
As Paul Krugman pointed out in his recent column in the New York Times, Iran’s G.D.P. was roughly the same as that of Connecticut and with a military budget roughly the same as Sweden’s. The United States, on the other hand, is the largest economy in the world. Its military budget, as the data of SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) showed, was larger than the next fourteen biggest military spenders combined, namely Britain, France, China, Japan, Germany, Russia, Italy, Saudi Arabia, India, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Brazil and Spain. Who has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, or weapons of mass destruction? You guessed it: the United States.
So why are we so scared of Iran, or Iraq before it? Remember it was the fear on the part of those with the vice president of the non-existing nuclear weapons hidden by Saddam Hussein, not the building of democracy, which was reason of America’s invasion of Iraq.
There is one explanation I can think of. It comes in a Chinese saying: “When you are big, you have big problems.” I guess in this case, it is this: when you are the biggest, you have the biggest fear.
Two. I also do not understand why it is the conservatives, especially the neocons, who are most scared of, or most hawkish on, Iran, or Iraq. They are usually the staunchest defenders of gun rights. One of their clever theories is that gun control would only limit the ability of people to defend themselves from gunmen. They believe that if more students owned and carried guns, schools would be a safer place, and Virginia Tech shooting, for instance, wouldn’t have taken place. In the same way, if more Americans owned and carried guns, American streets and neighborhoods would be safer, too.
They seem to be right: a society where only some people own and carry guns while others do not is not a safe society. But have they ever thought the same way about nuclear weapons? Is a world where only a few countries own and/or develop nuclear weapons while most do not a safe world? In their theory, the world should be a safer place if more countries had and/or developed nuclear weapons. Or better, make that every country in the world, including Iran, Israel, North Korea, South Korea, India, Pakistan, etc.
I can see conservatives’ point that guns are very useful. They protect, kill and deter. Nuclear weapons are the same. They also protect, kill and deter, only on a much larger scale. Therefore it should be a no brainer, even for gun activists, why when only five big powers (the US, Russia, Britain, France, and China) have nuclear weapons that other countries want them, too, especially those with a different ideology. They are simply scared, really scared.
So what shall we do about the fear of nuclear attacks, mutually shared by Vice President Cheney and Iranian President Ahmadinejad, and to make the world safer?
I would prefer the elimination of all nuclear weapons in the world, as proposed by Sen. Barack Obama recently and by a group of statesmen including George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn earlier this year. Considering, however, the stubbornness and power of the conservatives in America, I could also accept their theory regarding guns: let more countries, if not every country, have nuclear weapons.
But before that, Mr. Vice President, be careful with those trick-or-treaters tonight. Not only the image of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the spirit of Saddam Hussein might show up, too.
A few days ago, Mr. Cheney severely declared, “We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” I am not sure if he succeeded in scaring the Iranians by hinting American military attack or Americans with yet another imagined mushroom cloud from yet another cache of phantom nuclear weapons. I am sure, however, he sounded scared. I wonder why. I wondered four years ago when Mr. Cheney was scared in the same way.
I guess there are two things I can’t figure out.
One. I do not follow the logic that a sole superpower is so scared of a small country. Picture it: you are the richest and biggest guy in town, with the grandest and strongest mansion, and most importantly, the best security system. Yet you are so scared of a poor and short guy across the town that you want to him dead because he dreams of having your kind of security or just tries to find out how it works.
As Paul Krugman pointed out in his recent column in the New York Times, Iran’s G.D.P. was roughly the same as that of Connecticut and with a military budget roughly the same as Sweden’s. The United States, on the other hand, is the largest economy in the world. Its military budget, as the data of SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) showed, was larger than the next fourteen biggest military spenders combined, namely Britain, France, China, Japan, Germany, Russia, Italy, Saudi Arabia, India, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Brazil and Spain. Who has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, or weapons of mass destruction? You guessed it: the United States.
So why are we so scared of Iran, or Iraq before it? Remember it was the fear on the part of those with the vice president of the non-existing nuclear weapons hidden by Saddam Hussein, not the building of democracy, which was reason of America’s invasion of Iraq.
There is one explanation I can think of. It comes in a Chinese saying: “When you are big, you have big problems.” I guess in this case, it is this: when you are the biggest, you have the biggest fear.
Two. I also do not understand why it is the conservatives, especially the neocons, who are most scared of, or most hawkish on, Iran, or Iraq. They are usually the staunchest defenders of gun rights. One of their clever theories is that gun control would only limit the ability of people to defend themselves from gunmen. They believe that if more students owned and carried guns, schools would be a safer place, and Virginia Tech shooting, for instance, wouldn’t have taken place. In the same way, if more Americans owned and carried guns, American streets and neighborhoods would be safer, too.
They seem to be right: a society where only some people own and carry guns while others do not is not a safe society. But have they ever thought the same way about nuclear weapons? Is a world where only a few countries own and/or develop nuclear weapons while most do not a safe world? In their theory, the world should be a safer place if more countries had and/or developed nuclear weapons. Or better, make that every country in the world, including Iran, Israel, North Korea, South Korea, India, Pakistan, etc.
I can see conservatives’ point that guns are very useful. They protect, kill and deter. Nuclear weapons are the same. They also protect, kill and deter, only on a much larger scale. Therefore it should be a no brainer, even for gun activists, why when only five big powers (the US, Russia, Britain, France, and China) have nuclear weapons that other countries want them, too, especially those with a different ideology. They are simply scared, really scared.
So what shall we do about the fear of nuclear attacks, mutually shared by Vice President Cheney and Iranian President Ahmadinejad, and to make the world safer?
I would prefer the elimination of all nuclear weapons in the world, as proposed by Sen. Barack Obama recently and by a group of statesmen including George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn earlier this year. Considering, however, the stubbornness and power of the conservatives in America, I could also accept their theory regarding guns: let more countries, if not every country, have nuclear weapons.
But before that, Mr. Vice President, be careful with those trick-or-treaters tonight. Not only the image of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the spirit of Saddam Hussein might show up, too.
Print
Email
