They falsely claim that it’s time to cut America’s nuclear arsenal even further, that the US nuclear arsenal is “excess”, and that the US should rely on “diplomacy, economic sanctions, and conventional deterrence” instead!
Matlock also claims the US did not really win the Cold War or cause the USSR’s collapse. Furthermore, he claims in his book that Ronald Reagan’s sole (and secondary) contribution to ending the Cold War was supposedly abandoning the hawkish policies of his first term.
I was so happy to be president again. I leaped into my second term so happy because I thought I could do what I wanted with all my toys, like Air Force One, the Rule of Law, and the national economy.
Supporters of deep defense cuts, such as Sen. Rand Paul (RINO-KY) and former Senator Alan Simpson (RINO-WY) have used this graph and this false statistic to argue for further defense cuts, claiming, falsely, that the US has a $740 bn military budget and outspends the next 17 countries combined (Simpson).
Russia and China are rapidly growing and modernizing their nuclear arsenals, North Korea is perfecting its warheads and missiles, Iran is racing towards nuclear weapons, and what do Western arms control advocacy organizations advocate? That the US disarm itself unilaterally.
This was not an authorization for military operations anywhere. This was not a resolution of approval for President Bush’s policies. This was simply a resolution honoring the victims of 9/11.
And yet, Baldwin voted AGAINST it.
Are Republicans really that gullible? Are Republicans really surprised that Obama is reneging on his commitments regarding BOTH nuclear arsenal/facility modernization AND missile defense? That he’s willing to sell America out on missile defense as soon as he no longer has to face voters again?