Obama's Big Missile Test

Op Ed #4


Obama’s Big Missile Test
By Philip Taubman



A world without nuclear weapons is believed to be a world without war. This assertion has been made hypothetically for the past decade, yet it is only now within our reach. President Obama recently outlined a plan in Prague that might make this peaceful vision a reality. Many struggle, however, calling this vision, “peaceful.” Philip Taubman, author of the article Obama’s Big Missile Test, questions the validity of Obama’s attempts to remove all nuclear weapons off the face of the earth as well as whether or not his attempts are peaceful at all. His response to President Obama’s arms reduction is not stated plainly, yet the evidence he offers and the intended tone of the article reflect a negative stance on the issue. Taubman emphasizes how Obama has very little support from Congress and the Pentagon, and his influence on the periodic Nuclear Posture Review, a handbook issued by the Pentagon that regulates nuclear production, must be hindered. Taubman continues to stress that a world without nuclear weapons is not a peaceful world. A large nuclear stock has in previous years been an intimidation factor, especially during the Cold War. The United States has one of the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals in the world, which despite the current economic turmoil has kept countries such as North Korea and Iran from taking over. Removing this arsenal would be devastating to not only our homeland security, but to the security of the world. Obama’s arms reduction plan seems irrational to Democrats and Republicans alike, and puts the well- being of our country at risk. His plan is raising concern to the public who are now wondering whose side Obama is on.
Although Philip Taubman did not openly state his opinion in the article, it can easily be inferred by his tone that he was concerned about the issue and disagreed with Obama’s plan. The article was well written and factual, and contained no opinionated statements. Taubman did, however, use factual evidence to reveal his opinion. A note at the bottom of the article stated that Philip Taubman is a consulting professor at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His position there seems to parallel with his perspectives on international security. His position also adds validity to his claims, because he must be knowledgeable about international security to work in that field. Taubman makes his opinion visible also by making slight jabs at Obama. He hints at Obama’s apparent lack of experience in foreign affairs, and mocks his vision of a world with no nuclear weapons. The article presents Obama as almost naïve. Each comment directed toward President Obama was, however, backed by fact.