The irony seems completely lost on the range of republican presidential candidates whom, save Ron Paul of Texas, either implicitly or expressly support the use of “tactical” nuclear weapons should Iran appear to be on the verge of acquiring a centrifuge enabling them to produce nuclear weapons.

I don’t think it’s a good idea that Iran posses nuclear weapons; I don’t think it’s a good idea that anyone posses nuclear weapons. But the genie is out of the bottle and using nuclear weapons to prevent the use or acquisition of the same is foolish and calling it “tactical” is a lie. There is no such thing as a tactical nuclear weapon; their very use has strategic implications. Using a nuclear weapon is a strategy. And not a very good one.

Should we preemptively strike another nation with nuclear weapons – call them “tactical” if you want –we guarantee that sometime, someplace, the same will be used against us. It may not be the thirty minute response those of us old enough to really remember the Cold War came to expect in the sixties and seventies, but it will come.

And will we then preemptively nuke other countries as they insist on their right to exploit the genie we unleashed in the New Mexico desert in 1945? Where does it end? It is only in restraint that any moral leadership is possible.

George Bush has gotten the ball rolling in the abrogation of that moral leadership. It seems the Republicans that wish to be president have plans to finish the job.

I think we’d better decide just what sort of nation we intend on becoming.