Cluster Bombs

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

And this was the thought process that led to WWI.

Maybe so, but we cannot be too careful.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

And this was the thought process that led to WWI.

Maybe so, but we cannot be too careful.

Absolute nonsensical paranoia, but typical of american foreign policy.  Of course said paranoia provides the perfect cover for said policy's real motivation.

What do you think the policy's real motivation is?

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

What? The Cold War is over. Anyway, if the US were to go to war with any of those countries, I don't think China, Russia or Pakistan would be shouting for joy because the US had gotten rid of its cluster bombs. It's not like in their absence the US arsenal is ineffective.

True, but if we're giving something up, then other nations need to do so as well.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

What do you think the policy's real motivation is?

Dominating weaker countries, forcing capitalism upon them and thus sucking them dry.

That is not the intent of the United States.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

What? The Cold War is over. Anyway, if the US were to go to war with any of those countries, I don't think China, Russia or Pakistan would be shouting for joy because the US had gotten rid of its cluster bombs. It's not like in their absence the US arsenal is ineffective.

True, but if we're giving something up, then other nations need to do so as well.

Never thought of setting an example, did you?

Lack of cluster bombs won't kill us.

Never crossed my mind.

If the enemy, or potential enemy, has it, then we need to have it.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

What? The Cold War is over. Anyway, if the US were to go to war with any of those countries, I don't think China, Russia or Pakistan would be shouting for joy because the US had gotten rid of its cluster bombs. It's not like in their absence the US arsenal is ineffective.

True, but if we're giving something up, then other nations need to do so as well.

Never thought of setting an example, did you?

Lack of cluster bombs won't kill us.

Never crossed my mind.

If the enemy, or potential enemy, has it, then we need to have it.

Why? If they use cluster bombs, we use much stronger armaments.

True, but we cannot be at any sort of disadvantage.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Not until every other nation does as well.

That's a great philosophy, now, isn't it?

Until China, Russia, and Pakistan do so, we cannot afford to give up anything.

What? The Cold War is over. Anyway, if the US were to go to war with any of those countries, I don't think China, Russia or Pakistan would be shouting for joy because the US had gotten rid of its cluster bombs. It's not like in their absence the US arsenal is ineffective.

True, but if we're giving something up, then other nations need to do so as well.

Never thought of setting an example, did you?

Lack of cluster bombs won't kill us.

Never crossed my mind.

If the enemy, or potential enemy, has it, then we need to have it.

Why? If they use cluster bombs, we use much stronger armaments.

True, but we cannot be at any sort of disadvantage.

It isn't a disadvantage if we're still stronger.

I hope you realize what continuous armament means.

I do, but it is a disadvantage if the enemy has something we don't.