Search Details

Word: nuclearism (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...CTBT, signed by 154 nations in 1996, would require all member nations to ban underground nuclear testing. The Senate vote was a major setback to proponents of reducing nuclear proliferation as well as a potentially fatal blow to the treaty itself, which will probably not be internationally ratified as a result of the decision. Other nations with nuclear weapons, including Russia and China, had indicated that they would make their decisions based on the United States' decision. The treaty must be approved by the world's 44 nuclear armed nations to take effect--so far, only 26 have...

Author: By Shawn P. Saler, | Title: A Partisan Blow to Peace | 10/18/1999 | See Source »

...pursuing this neo-isolationist policy, the US has hurt not only its credibility with other nations, but its own interests as well. Since the U.S. does not currently conduct nuclear tests, ratifying the treaty would have little effect on U.S. policy--but it would have induced other countries to change their currently hazardous policies...

Author: By Shawn P. Saler, | Title: A Partisan Blow to Peace | 10/18/1999 | See Source »

...United States should have realized that the cold war has ended and that building a "bigger and better bomb" is no longer a viable foreign policy. With a nuclear arsenal that already obscenely overshadows all other countries, America needs to focus instead on leading the way in decreasing unsafe proliferation...

Author: By Shawn P. Saler, | Title: A Partisan Blow to Peace | 10/18/1999 | See Source »

Suddenly, it seems as if every nuclear arms control agreement of the past 30 years is on the table. Days after losing a Senate vote on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Clinton administration is now trying a new tactic to get Russian approval to revise one of the baseline arms control documents, the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty. The carrot, according to the New York Times: If the Russians agree not to squawk over plans to create radar-and-interceptor missile defenses in Alaska and North Dakota (a violation of the treaty), the U.S. will help Russia upgrade...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: If Clinton Can't Prevail Over That Nuke Treaty, How About This? | 10/17/1999 | See Source »

...American build-up really necessary? The White House thinks so, arguing that the ABMs will counter emerging threats from North Korea and China, countries that do not have an extensive nuclear arsenal but will within a few years have the capacity to deliver a small number of warheads to targets in the U.S. Republicans, reading this as Son of Star Wars, enthusiastically agree. On the other hand, the bang for the buck may be very small - the greater nuclear threat may come not from missiles but in small packages hand-delivered by terrorists - compared to the potential dangers that accompany...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: If Clinton Can't Prevail Over That Nuke Treaty, How About This? | 10/17/1999 | See Source »

Previous | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | Next