President Obama is scheduled to make a speech this week which will include reference to relationships with Mid-East nations. I hope mention about nuclear war materials will be made, and perhaps an opportunity will be made to offer reductions in the USA nuke arsenal -- as a gesture toward improving peace potentials.
I did some pondering today and am glad to share these notes with you. A Ploughshare somewhat recent report says an estimated 2,200 nuke warheads exist in the USA and Russia arsenals. Assuming that half of those -- 1,100. that is -- are on USA soil, it would mean that on the average, each of our 50 states would house 22 of them.
Can you imagine where the 22 would be placed in Florida? Maybe 5 in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale area. Then 5 in the Jacksonville Naval Base area. Another 5 in the Tampa-St. Pete area because of MacDill AFB/Centcom headquarters. Put 3 in the Pensacola/Elgin AFB area, another 3 in the Cape Canaveral area, and 1 in the Orlando area.
If the proximity of housing a nuke warhead makes the surrounding vicinity vulnerable as a target of enemy missiles, etc., would we in Brandon (10 miles from Tampa) feel danger because of the nearby target, or would we feel more secure because of its presence?
Or, would our attitude be this: "As a defensive/security matter, the USA must have warheads and nuke warring capabilities, and they have to be positioned somewhere, but please don't put them in my neighborhood!"
If we have 1100 warheads, does that mean they all are housed on USA soil? Or, has Canada agreed to have some of them installed in their home areas? Likewise, Mexico? Or, perhaps Panama, etc.?
Now, if we can get our fellow American citizens to fear nukes enough to have them eradicated, maybe we could then get the citizens in Pakistan, India, North Korea, France, Israel, Russia, etc., likewise fearful -- so the banning of nuclear arsenals could become fact. For humanity's sake, of course. But, hey! Let us not forget that we're all humanity!!
-- Paul Dinnis