Just Like Sept. 11, Only With Nuclear

The Real Issue Of Dealing With Proliferation Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction: Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Is: What Is Your Tolerance For Risk? And My Tolerance For Risk For Wmd Proliferation Is Pretty Close To Zero. Because Otherwise, We And Our Allies Are At The Mercy Of Regimes Like Ahmadinejad And The Mullahs In Tehran, Or Kim Jong Il And The Hitler-in-the-bunker Mentality In Pyongyang, Or Others Who Don't Share Our Calculus On The Value Of Human Life.

I'm Not Running Around The World Looking For Ways To Create Hostilities.

I Wouldn't Give Up On Russia, And With Oil At $90 A Barrel, They Can Refurbish Their Strategic Capabilities And Under An Authoritarian Regime, Those Nuclear Weapons Are Still There And In The Wrong Hands We Might Have A Problem Again.

I Have Looked At Public Opinion Polls In France In The Late 1940s And Early 1950s During The Height Of Marshall Plan Aid. They Had A Very Negative Attitude Towards The United States Then. There Were Negative Attitudes Towards The United States Because Of Vietnam. There Were Negative Attitudes About The United States When Reagan Wanted To Deploy Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles. I Don't Think The President Should Base His Foreign Policy On American Public Opinion Polls, Let Alone Foreign Public Opinion Polls.

You Don't Need To Spend Tens Of Millions Of Dollars On Political Consultants To Tell You What You Think When You Already Know What You Think.