Worlwide Nuclear Security Summit
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-03-27/worlwide-nuclear-security-summit
Weapons-grade nuclear material is stored at an estimated one hundred sites worldwide. Many of these sites are unsecured, leaving them vulnerable to terrorists. Leaders of 54 nations are meeting in South Korea on the second of a two-day summit on keeping nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists. But the world’s biggest nuclear concerns remain focused on North Korea and Iran, who did not attend the Summit but whose actions loom large over its participants. Diane and guests discuss the global nuclear summit and what it means for the future of worldwide security.
Guests
Joseph Cirincione
president, Ploughshares Fund
Corey Hinderstein
vice president, international program, The Nuclear Threat Initiative
Stephen Rademaker
principal, The Podesta Group, and former Assistant Secretary of State for President Bush (2002 - 2006), where he directed nonproliferation policy toward Iran and North Korea
Yochi Dreazen
senior national security correspondent, National Journal magazine
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Remember when Michael Douglas first announced that he was joining Ploughshares and tried to talk about what they do at the U.N.? Almost all of the questions were:
Why are you here?
What good can another celeb do?
And lots of really boring Gordon Gekko jokes
Why do we have the right to tell other sovereign states they can't have nuclear weapons (aside from the obvious that we do and they don't)? Is intl. law only a tool to be manipulated for your own self interests? Or, does it mean something?
The US is hypocritical on the issue.
The Non-Proliferation Treaty would have us reduce our weapons - we do not.
And then there is Israel . . . . . No sanctions against Israel.
The only possible way to control nuclear weapons is to create a one-world economic and political union. The problem with that is that the only way to maintain this union would be through brute force. And most likely this would lead to rebellion, which could then lead to the ultimate nightmare: nuclear war.
I really do believe that mankind has gotten itiself into a situation that it can't get out of peacefully. Perhaps we are heading into a situation where "the living will envy the dead". Only time will tell, of course. It just doesn't look hopeful at all. High-flown words and "positive thinking" are highly questionable.
No, "one-world" is not the only possible way to control nuclear weapons. 90% of stockpiles have been dismantled through negotiation and treaty. International treaties have long defined treatment of POWs and outlawed use of poison gas, for a couple examples - a strong, enforceable framework of negotiation and verification is well short of "one-world".
Why was Iran not there to defend the indirect and direct claims that they are starting to create nuclear weapons?
Is this not a the drum beat before war?
This feels like propaganda because it is one sided and relies on a shared fear of a mysterious unnamed "terrorist."
well I don't know where all this will lead. I do think Republicans should have no legitimate say on this issue as they are weak on Defense. They had their chance they invaded a country that did not have WMDs and now they want a second chance!!! I DON"T THINK SO!!!! "fool me once shame on you ....won't get fooled again" (George Bush)
Why has the Republican congress cut funding to the department that seeks out and collects nuclear material from all over the world??
After 39:00, Yochi states that there hasn't been a war in decades. Maybe not as to fighting, but the Korean War has never officially ended.
Thanks for having Joseph Cirincione from Ploughshares on your panel.
He was a great improvement from the Iran war proponents you often host.
His presence seemed to temper war fever among the others.
Why are there no international conferences aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons?
Putting off talk about elimination of nuclear weapons is a nod to Israel. If we are ever going to talk about eliminating nuclear weapons, we will need to have honesty and transparency about who actually has weapons already.
Because Israel prefers to keep the question of whether they have nuclear weapons as an official secret, any conversation among nations about intentions and actions regarding abolition of nuclear weapons might be seen by participants and observers as a sham. So, we see no conversation, rather than dialogue that could mean a more secure world for future generations, but that would also draw unwanted attention to Israeli policy.
Natural law requires respect of PUBLIC property rights, too