Nuclear Disarmament part 2

In this New York Post article by Rich Lowry, he states, "The meme in the press was how the test launch made Obama's disarmament speech all the more "urgent." It really makes it all the more childish and dangerous. In setting the goal of "Global Zero", Obama hitched himself to a project as utopian as President George W. Bush's ambition to end tyranny in the world." He goes on to state, "In fact, they're essentially the same goal. The bipartisan congressional Strategic Posture Review concluded in an interim report that to achieve Global Zero would require a "fundamental transformation of the world political order." All significant geopolitical conflicts would have to end, and all untrustworthy governments disappear. The verification regime would have to be so all-encompassing as to constitute a kind of world government."

This is exactly what I was getting at in my entry from yesterday. Obama's entire plan is predicated on the notion you can force various regimes to comply, and that "immediate consequences" would facilitate the desired aim, nuclear disarmament. It's Obama's naivete that allows him to believe such a plan could be successful. Yes, the United States could disarm itself, however the consequence would be that any Nation with a nuclear weapon would be in a position to blackmail other countries, including the United States. It does beg the question however, when a "fundamental transformation of the world political order" is needed to achieve nuclear disarmament, if that perhaps is not Obama's goal. "The verification regime would have to be so all-encompassing as to constitute a kind of world government." Is this the white horse leading up to the red horse or what comes after all four horses of the Apocalypse? I haven't figured it out yet.