Obama Shared Vision Of "Nuclear Free World" In College Magazine

New York Times:

In the depths of the cold war, in 1983, a senior at Columbia University wrote in a campus newsmagazine, Sundial, about the vision of "a nuclear free world.He railed against discussions of "first- versus second-strike capabilities that "suit the military-industrial interests" with their "billion-dollar erector sets, and agitated for the elimination of global arsenals holding tens of thousands of deadly warheads.

The student was Barack Obama, and he was clearly trying to sort out his thoughts. In the conclusion, he denounced "the twisted logic of which we are a part today and praised student efforts to realize "the possibility of a decent world. But his article, "Breaking the War Mentality, which only recently has been rediscovered, said little about how to achieve the utopian dream.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[jubei]

Sometimes I wish Obama wasn't president because america isn't ready for him,and he's under so much pressure because he gotta answer his bosses Kisinger,R­othschild,­Rockefelle­r,AIPAC,tr­ilateral commision etc,I know everybody includin myself is pushin for a single payers health care but its not gonna happen I might sound crazy and all that but Pres.Obama got to listen to his bosses and if he doesn't abide by their wishes remember whut happen to JFK and MLK!!

[dteg]

Any info on what he wrote in the 1st grade. Why is this a story.I see no new info here.

[FebM]

Except a consistent well informed student Obama who is now Prez

[AZterritory]

Well said--wonder what Failin' Palin was doing 21 years ago? Oh yeah, maybe checking out one of her (was it 6?) colleges?

[Pquilson]

No such thing as a well informed student. Those terms must necessarily be mutually exclusive.

[pearlx2]

This IS news -- it shows that our illustrious president has been thinking these very impressive thoughts since he was 18-20 years old; while other college seniors were out drinking and partying, Obama was contemplating how to acquire a nuclear free world. It shows that he didn't just pick a platform to run on the year he announced his candidacy -- this man obviously has a long-standing desire to create a better world for people everywhere. It shows that he's thoughtful and a deep thinker. How many of our other elected officials can we say that about?

We are SO blessed to have him as our president.

[ObamanextPresident]

Exactly ! Thank you.

[flash LI]

True, but he volunteered all documents.

Also, in the summer of 2008, the Dems in Congress opened an investigation on McCain to see if he was a natural born citizen because of him being born in Panama. The Dems were satisfied that he was a natural born citizen. Yet the guy that would be more like to have been born in another country or not a natural born citizen was passed over completely.

"Well, that because he was already qualified as a Senator." Wrong The standard is higher for President. As a Senator you have no need to be a natural born citizen - or in the House. Governors too are exempt from being a natural born citizen - consider Arnold. Nope, I wonder why the secrecy?

[flash LI]

Sorry, don't know how this was duplicated.

[flash LI]

Yep, sure am. You would be too if you didn't guzzle that kool-aid. HAHA LOL

[Talossa]

Wasn't it the Bushies in 2000 who first raised the "McCain is Panamanian, not American" story?

[Sweetbay]

"Few would argue the U.S. nuclear policy has made the world safer from the threat of next-use nuclear employment. In fact, a recent Congressional Commission has concluded that “unless the world community acts decisively and with great urgency, it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack… by 2013.” And nuclear weapons place the U.S. in a moral, ethical, legal, and therefore political dilemma, which makes their use by the U.S. highly unlikely, thereby negating their deterrence effect. In that light, George Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger, and Sam Nunn published a series of articles which called upon the U.S. to lead a global effort to abolish nuclear weapons."

"The “Gang of Four” argued that reliance on nuclear deterrence is becoming “increasingly hazardous and decreasingly ineffectiv­e.” Nuclear weapons dependence, they argue, only increases the likelihood of catastrophic terrorism, “nuclear accidents, misjudgments, and unauthorized launches.” Mikhail Gorbachev still agrees with the goal of disbarment. He wrote, “It is becoming clearer that nuclear weapons are no longer a means of achieving security; in fact, with every passing year they make our security more precarious­.”

http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/fulfilling-reagan%E2%80%99s-dream-nuclear-disarmament

[Sweetbay]

After reading the posts here, I now see proof that reading comprehension scores in the U.S. have continued to decline when other industrialized nations have improved their scores.


In 1986 at the Reykjavik summit, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, both passionate about nuclear disarmament, shocked deterrence experts with an unimaginable proposal – total nuclear disarmament. “It would be fine with me if we eliminated all nuclear weapons,” said Reagan. “We can do that,” replied Gorbachev, “Let’s eliminate them. We can eliminate them”

http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/fulfilling-reagan%E2%80%99s-dream-nuclear-disarmament

[Talossa]

In 1988 the only Republican candidate to break with Reagan's ludicrous "get rid of nuclear weapons" -slash-Star Wars scheme was Al Haig, who argued, reasonably, that without a nuclear deterrent, the side with the bigger army would win. And that side definitely wasn't the US, at least in 1988. How soon we forget that total nuclear disarmament used to be part of the GOP playbook.

[pearlx2]

"After reading the posts here, I now see proof that reading comprehension scores in the U.S. have continued to decline when other industrialized nations have improved their scores."

Sad, but true.

[PeaceIsMyName]

“It’s naïve for us to think,” he said, “that we can grow our nuclear stockpiles, the Russians continue to grow their nuclear stockpiles, and our allies grow their nuclear stockpiles, and that in that environment we’re going to be able to pressure countries like Iran and North Korea not to pursue nuclear weapons themselves­.”

I like that quote above.
Does Obama want a nuclear free world or just a nuclear free world in non-allied countries? And why is there such secrecy with Israel's nuclear stockpile?

Let's see if Obama reduces America's nuclear weapons and how all that works out...

[jubei]

Whether you like this man President Obama or not I notice 1 thing with all the name calling and racist remarks toward him and his family and the criticism he's getting from the left and right wing and pundits,this man remains dilligent,­unflapable­,calm and steady in his agenda's whether good or bad unlike Sarah Palin who quitted and can't take the heat but tryin to run for president,trolls let me see you respond to that wit your sarcastic messiah or barry taunts,iam waiting!!

[flash LI]

Chairman 'O' speaks for himself - on both sides.

[sizogee]

Both sides of what?

Make sense, please!

[mohawk79]

Must be nice to live in Fantasy land

[sizogee]

Is that the place were everyone remains abstinent until marriage, homosexuality doesn't exist, and nobody has to pay any taxes?

[iceage7]

yeah must be nice to live in fantasy and became the 44th president of the USA and on his way to russia to achieve that fantasy. Obama got game

[wonketteRAWKS]

Wow, something from the lost Columbia Years was...ahem­, "rediscovered"?

Sounds like things haven't changed. This is where we should be, but of course, no plan on how to achieve it.

[wingnutgator]

the naivete of our pres. is truly frightening. does anyone with a brain really believe that russia,china, pakistan, india and israel will ever give up nukes. they are moderinizing their arsenals while we let ours deteriorate. i believe with all my heart that russia and china have plans to destroy us and if we do not maintain a credible nuclear threat we will live and then die to regret it.

[CitizenFarmer]

Remember, he did coke in college.

[sholbo]

You are a fool

[sholbo]

You are a f%$l

[rollingdivision]

Among other things.

[diak0n0s]

Let's see.

North Korea firing longer range missles and threating South Korea, Japan and the US.

Iran on the verge of nuclear weapons.

A President who doesn't seemed concerned, and 70% of today's HuffPO is about Palin.

I'd say we've got a big problem here.

[wonketteRAWKS]

Go figure!

[betty22]

oh boy now i have heard of everything

[research]

Pure BS. Obama is funding more nuclear reactors and selling nuclear tech to UAE.

[flash LI]

A college mag? Let's hope it stays there. Only a kool-aid guzzler would think that the US should lead by example and unilaterally disarm. It's a good Utopian thought, but unrealistic. HEY, STEP AWAY FROM THAT BUCKET OF KOOL-AID! HAHA lol

[harriscrl3]

You might try READING up on this but if the US got rid of 50% its nuclear arsenal there is still enough to OBLITERATE the entire world 10 times over hence why THEY NEED TO START. Why would you need to have enough weapons to destroy the world ten times over. Does that even sound sane.

[flash LI]

I have no problem with this. Maybe more! But we must defend ourselves. There's crappy folks out there - and no matter how sweet and nice we appear, they would still cut our throats.

[MegWe]

Doid he say ANYTHING about unilateral disarmament? No...not in his college days or in recent years. Read the entire article.

[flash LI]

Oh I have read the article, but I've listened to several of his sound clips that are pretty clear - not to mention several other that the Chairman considers in his policy development. They are clear on this. If it ends up that we can cut the nukes down a bit, more power to him. But my skepticism is not just based upon this one issue.

[flash LI]

UPDATE:

Yes, there is nothing that Obama has said about 'unilateral', but it's almost been a standing policy for leftist groups here in the US - mostly because the threat is either discounted or minimized to where one would suggest this. Hopefully he can see the reality and act accordingly.

[mendelcrosses]

If you only understood what the word Utopia meant in that statement.

It meant a WORLD free of nukes and not just the USA free of nukes.

Now,if the entire world was free of nukes,tell me that you wont like it.

[flash LI]

Definitely! That included too. It would be great. However, no nukes doesn't mean 'no mean people'. We will always have them - and they are most folks we wouldn't suspect. We have to be vigilant.