The ABC News web site currently features a dramatic picture of a nuclear bomb blast (a cropped version of which appears at right) along with a story blurb that matches Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim that the U.S. is hypocritical to seek to prevent nations like Iran and North Korea from getting the bomb while we still preserve our nuclear arsenal.
The headline: "You Can't Build Nukes. But We Can" followed by this short story tease: "A decision has been made to update and redesign America's aging stockpile of nuclear weapons, even as the U.S. demands that Iran and North Korea not build up their own arsenals."
When you click on the actual AP report, written by Scott Lindlaw, readers see a much more neutral headline, "Bush Administration Picks Lawrence Livermore Warhead Design," and the story mainly focuses on the technical reasons for updating the country's nuclear technology. Deep in the story, however, Lindlaw cited critics who thought the U.S. was sending the "wrong signal" to the world's rogue regimes.
An excerpt:
The government spends billions of dollars each year tending to its aging stockpile. The administration has dubbed the program to design a safer and more effective warhead the Reliable Replacement Warhead.
Critics fear the project could send the wrong signal to the world at a time when the United States and its allies are trying to curb the spread of nuclear technology.
The announcement comes at a time when the administration is engaged in delicate disarmament negotiations with North Korea, which reportedly possesses several nuclear weapons, and Iran, which the administration fears wants them.
Iran recently called on the United States to abandon its nuclear weapons program.
Opponents of the program also question whether a next-generation bomb can improve reliability and safety if it cannot be tested. Congress has financed the research on the condition that the redesigned weapon reduce the need for testing.
Does anyone at ABC, or the AP for that matter, really think that America's nuclear arsenal, which hasn't been used since 1945, is as dangerous as nukes in the hands of Iran's ayatollahs or the unstable Kim Jong-Il? If so, they really haven't been paying attention for the past 60 years.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
It's called being the world's
March 2, 2007 - 15:57 ET by alcatrazIt's called being the world's only superpower. Membership has its privileges.
Just this story?ABC rated t
March 2, 2007 - 16:07 ET by JDWJust this story?
ABC rated third far behind second NBC in last week's Nielsens
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
US Rogue Regime?
March 2, 2007 - 16:19 ET by Six String SpiffFirst of all, the US is not a "regime"...
That's a nice future shot of Iran though. YAY! They have been praying for their 12 Imam or whatever.. Lets give it to em!!!
Alas.. My country has no nuts.. So I can only sit and watch the drive-bys manipulate the retarded masses. ..........
Sure, I watch the MSM... Through a pair of crosshairs.
The USA invented the A-bomb w
March 2, 2007 - 16:20 ET by upcountrywaterThe USA invented the A-bomb we also invented the H-bomb. You are a thief, keep it up and we will send you a free sample.
Iran and North Korea are not
March 2, 2007 - 16:21 ET by MidAmericaIran and North Korea are not building nukes. The ruling class of those countries are. Do you think the North Korean peasants as they eat grass trying to stay alive are happy to do their part for national pride? No! It has nothing to do with the people of these captives nations.
Just because Al Capone ran much of Chicago at one time should it have been his 'right' to have the same fire power as the police?
Does NK have any grass left t
March 2, 2007 - 16:39 ET by Clear thinkerDoes NK have any grass left to eat?
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
In my humble view, we, as the
March 2, 2007 - 16:35 ET by bassndudeIn my humble view, we, as the United States of America, like it or not, are the big boys on the block. The biggest problem we have is nerve. If we sent in 250,000 troops into Iraq, killed people and broke things, choked off the borders, we would be in better shape to deal with Iran and Syria. When they started poking their noses into Iraq, we caught them, killed the people they sent in, and bombed their military and nuclear sights at the first sign of trouble and droped one of those 10000 pounders on the Syrian royal palace then, where would we be today? If NK had fired a missle, test or not, and we fired one into NK, we would not be having any problems with those idiots now. Perhaps I am a little rash or harsh, but what good is having nukes if we dont use them and back up what we tell those little worms? Play nice or Else!
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Bass...I have a gut feeling t
March 2, 2007 - 16:49 ET by Clear thinkerBass...
I have a gut feeling that we did not send more troops to Iraq because our government and our military were afraid we would leave ourselves vulnerable to attack from other sources. One of the lessons we learned in WWII was the possibility of having to fight two wars at once.
I'm divided over the use of nukes because I still worry about China and Russia (especially Russia) having a knee-jerk reaction and deciding it's time to let some of their nukes fly before they rust away.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Clear...I am in agreement wit
March 2, 2007 - 16:58 ET by bassndudeClear...I am in agreement with the reason limiting the number of troops. After all, our smaller, lighter Military is streached right now. China and Russia would scream if we used nukes, thats for sure. But if they knew, for a fact, that we have them and will use them when we think we need to, I dont think they would risk it. They might, but I think not. If the world knew that the US had the nerve to use them, and would not hesitate when deemed nessary, Iran and Syria would be singing a diffrent tune today. My thinking is all. Im old school. I think in a war, you kill and break and blow stuff up till they cry "uncle", then give them one more good kick or to, just to make your point. It is at that time, you can start to talk to em.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Bass...I agree with you to a
March 2, 2007 - 17:06 ET by Clear thinkerBass...
I agree with you to a point. I too would rather see them beaten down to a point where they lose all hope in trying to screw with us. However, the rest of the world woul go ape-s*** over it and eventually our economy would look like it did during the depression.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Clear, well, yes your right a
March 2, 2007 - 17:21 ET by bassndudeClear, well, yes your right about europe. But what would happen while we have our finger on the pulse of the world? The oil. That would be the leverage we would have to use with the new little fledgling goverments that suvrived in the little countries of Iran and Syria. Definately, France and Germany would squeal, but oil would be a large concern for them. Im not sure that europe could survive without us anyway.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Europe is turning more and mo
March 3, 2007 - 12:27 ET by UnsaneEurope is turning more and more into a pathetic, whiny backwater anyways, babying themselves into oblivion. I agree with you bass, the Europeans can't hack it without the United States and they know this better than we do.
The next time a nuke gets popped by...whoever...it is going to me a MASSIVE thing, hence no one is likely to use one, but they are nice to have in order to shut people up and make them behave. Besides, democratic nations tha have them don't concern me so much, as they have civilian political control over their weaponry, and as such, are less likely to use them. Nations like China and nominal, fledgling democracies like Russia concern me more so as to their possession of nukes. Clearly, ABC cannot distinguish that difference.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
The dems claimed they were
March 2, 2007 - 17:04 ET by JDWThe dems claimed they were put into power to end the war yet they have accomplished nothing towards those ends. They continue to run in circles without the ability to satisfy either their goals or polls continually returning to the point where they began. These are the same people who are witnessing the victories of which we are being firewalled. The public knows who America is, what we are capable of, and why defeat is unacceptable. Political promises do not make a loss of any sort acceptable. Our families are dying today an will continue to be murdered until we 'deal with the problem'. If Iran and Syria do not stop supplying or building, it is up to us to prevent the inevitable. We cannot allow them to force the issue of innocent lives in their countries to justify the deaths of our own.
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
JDW...The idiots may not know
March 2, 2007 - 17:13 ET by Clear thinkerJDW...
The idiots may not know it, but the dems are actually encouraging the bad guys. If this continues, we are screwed!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
You mentioned Russia earlie
March 2, 2007 - 17:19 ET by JDWYou mentioned Russia earlier, who has idententified their supplying of Syria?
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
JDW...I don't know the answer
March 2, 2007 - 17:24 ET by Clear thinkerJDW...
I don't know the answer to that.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Reiterating you're point, j
March 2, 2007 - 17:31 ET by JDWReiterating you're point, just as the story of Syrian weapons discovered in Iraq is hidden, so to are the Russian deals. The new media and dems are siding against America in these cases by hiding facts.
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
JDW...I don't know of any Rus
March 2, 2007 - 17:34 ET by Clear thinkerJDW...
I don't know of any Russian deals, but I know that they cannot trusted. They always have and always will be a huge thorn in our sides.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
clear/bass;HereJDWWounded s
March 2, 2007 - 17:42 ET by JDWclear/bass;
Here
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
JDW...Thanks for the link.Why
March 2, 2007 - 17:46 ET by Clear thinkerJDW...
Thanks for the link.
Why am I not surprised!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
JDW...very informative read,
March 2, 2007 - 17:46 ET by bassndudeJDW...very informative read, thanks.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
JDW...I do not have any knowl
March 2, 2007 - 17:37 ET by bassndudeJDW...I do not have any knowledge of Russian interferance in Iran or Syria or Iraq. One thing I am sure of, is their fingers are in there somewhere. They will use this a a proxy war with the US as we used Afghanistan aginst them, as they and China used Vietnam aginst us. They will ride this as far as they can for all they can get, untill these terrorists turn on them to. But by that time it will be to late, and they to will have to come in force, or use their own nukes.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Nuclear Warheads Are An Insurance Plan
March 2, 2007 - 16:39 ET by emjem24The ABC/AP have mixed and contrary priorities when they use a nuclear bomb blast picture to infer that the world has more to fear from the US than others like Iran, China, and North Korea. What they fail to acknowledge is the rationale behind having nuclear weapons in the first place.
For Iran - terrorize the Middle East and become the regional, hegemonic power. For North Korea - restart the Korean War and invade South Korea before eventually taking it over. For China - having sway over the entirety of Asia. For US - defensive insurance. We haven't used nuclear weapons since WW II and we stand by that record. There is no shame in having a nuclear weapon as leverage against real baddies like Iran and North Korea. It's strategic, smart, and defensive.
There are a lot of anti-nuke freaks out there like the ABC/AP who think it perfectly all right for terror friendly nations such as Iran and North Korea to have these weapons. In their scewed view, it "balances" out America's power. Let's really say what this is all about. People, like these elitist, liberal, commie-loving journalists, are "uncomfortable" that US has nuclear weapons but don't feel the same about Iran and North Korea having them. We've never used ours in the modern era but these two countries have already stated their intentions of what they see as the ultimate check mate if they possess and use them.
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
Call me crazy, but a strategy
March 2, 2007 - 16:56 ET by Clear thinkerCall me crazy, but a strategy that I think would work is the following...
Using back channels we send a message to all countries with large groups of radical Islamist that we will nuke them if we ever get hit by a terrorist nuke. Not hit them one at a time but all at once, including Pakistan. This would force countries like Pakistan to go after all terrorists with gusto.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Thats nice to Clear. One nuke
March 2, 2007 - 16:59 ET by bassndudeThats nice to Clear. One nuke, one less country to worry about.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Does anyone ... really thin
March 2, 2007 - 16:42 ET by Tom1969caShort answer: yes. Liberals do.
Iran has promised to exterminate the "zionist vermin" in Palestine, and Kim Jong-Il would like nothing better than a united Korea. Anyone with half a brain must consider both nations a high threat to actually use their nukes as soon as they become operational.
However, the fact that no-one in the growing list of popgun nations with The Bomb has ever actually used them is proof enough for me that America's long-standing policy of deterence works, and works well.
~~~
Grammar Tip of the Day:
The phrase "I support the troops" should never be followed by the word "but".
The AP obviously has forgotte
March 2, 2007 - 17:10 ET by Clear thinkerThe AP obviously has forgotten the difference between 'defensive' and 'offensive'.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Who watches ABC?
March 2, 2007 - 17:36 ET by PlaceboWho watches ABC anyway? Only liberals; as well, those whose preference is to remain ill-informed and get off loathing America. Come to think of it, the same goes for NBS, CBS and their cable comrades.
This continuous sniping and dissemination of anti-American vitriol would have been deemed treachery some decades ago. The past number of decades it has become a fashion accessory, for the leftist-media and their mental-Munchkin viewers, to judge America as the Great Satan.
Today, one doesn’t have to be French amoeba to despise the U.S; just a malcontent of socialist persuasion, along with a humongous bug stuck somewhere in one’s anatomy.
How about we nuke ABC? And AP
March 3, 2007 - 12:35 ET by ThisnThatHow about we nuke ABC? And AP, for good measure?
MAD - Mecca's Assured Destruction
March 3, 2007 - 12:37 ET by Free StinkerWhy waste a perfectly good Nuclear warhead when there are so many other deserving targets?
Like Mecca . . .
I think the headline was horr
March 2, 2007 - 19:08 ET by AtheistRepublicanI think the headline was horrible, but it was for shock value, from the description of the article it sounds like it had a somewhat legitmate point, that maybe this isn't the best time for nuclear upgrades, though not one I agree with. They certainly should have toned down the headline and made it fit the contents better however.
I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, someone want to set me straight?
The headline is to give whoev
March 2, 2007 - 19:30 ET by MidAmericaThe headline is to give whoever wants to oppose the United States military a talking point which if used will then be seriously reported as 'news'.
They do it for the democrats all the time.
.
March 2, 2007 - 20:15 ET by directorblueWell, if they really feel that Iran and the U.S. are morally equivalent, perhaps they could visit Iran and investigate how women, gays, Christians, and Jews are treated.
Memo to Mahmoud and Kim Jong
March 2, 2007 - 23:45 ET by Chicago Republican<edit/add> "...along with a story blurb that matches Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim that the U.S. is hypocritical to seek to prevent nations like Iran and North Korea from getting the bomb while we still preserve our nuclear arsenal."
Memo to Mahmoud and Kim Jong Il. Release control of your media. Stop obstructing the exercise of God given rights by your citizens, ie, the right to free speech, the right to trial by jury, the right to not be held without charge, and most of all, grant your citizenry the right to keep and bear arms. Then come and lecture the US and GWB about the possession/proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
**************
Support the Spread of Open Society and Capitalism around the World. Do it for the Children.
If you work for ABC...or any
March 3, 2007 - 09:40 ET by AlgerHissIf you work for ABC...or any of the other alphabet-soup broadcast networks, you need to understand something: I don’t care if you are the janitor or the camera operator or perhaps you work in payroll, you are a dishonorable person.
Only someone with zero character would work for these companies. You are not to be trusted. You ought to be shunned. You are shameless and have no soul. You have no standards for decent human behavior.
I pity you.
Rochester, Minnesota: A Fem_Leftist City!