I know it may be pushing the envelope a bit, but an actual binding agreement of some kind would have been great. Actions against known weapons proliferators with nuclear capabilities such as North Korea would have been an accomplishment, as well. And, as crazy as it sounds, I actually hoped the Nuclear Summit would result in sanctions against Iran, or at least meaningful progress towards that end.
Really though, you can pick any metric you like besides "meaningless rhetoric" and this summit fails to measure up. IIRC, the last time a president convened a summit this large, the United Nations was formed.
Ah, but my entire argument does not rest on Obama bowing, but on the substance of this summit - which is lacking. It is interesting that you are trying to paint this as some sort of rightist propaganda. Criticism of the summit has come from all political corners.If your entire argument rests on the WND/FoxNews meme about bowing, well, you get what you paid for, which ain't much. Propose a serious argument and you'll get a serious response. Recycle rightist memes and you'll get a pimp slap.
Holy ad hominem, Batman!So having large stockpiles of enriched uranium sitting about in underfunded facilities in the former Soviet Union is what most proliferation experts would call an abysmally bad idea.
Your flippant, ignorant comparison to used hypodermic needles shows how completely unserious you are on this issue. If you have a neighbor who won't take care of, say, some medical waste, it's not a big issue. If, on the other hand, your neighbor has a stockpile of gasoline, gunpowder and thermite fuses that he won't secure, you might consider it a security issue. If you had your brain even slightly plugged in.
Who is saying that proliferation isn't a concern? That’s the point! Very little was done at the conference to deal with it.
Bookmarks