HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499.jpg
2.63 MB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
4
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Book excerpt / policy paper / article
File Size:
2.63 MB
Summary
This document appears to be page 13 of a political analysis, book, or speech regarding nuclear disarmament policy ('global zero'). It argues that US disarmament might encourage adversaries like Iran and North Korea to pursue nuclear weapons rather than deter them. While part of the House Oversight production (Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499), this specific page contains no direct references to Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, or their immediate network, focusing instead on geopolitical strategy involving figures like Obama, Kissinger, and Shultz.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Barack Obama | Former US President |
Mentioned regarding his commitment to eliminating nuclear weapons and his speech in Prague.
|
| George Shultz | Former Secretary of State |
Listed as committed to the elimination of nuclear weapons.
|
| Henry Kissinger | Former Secretary of State |
Listed as committed to the elimination of nuclear weapons.
|
| William Perry | Former Secretary of Defense |
Listed as committed to the elimination of nuclear weapons.
|
| Sam Nunn | Former Senator |
Listed as committed to the elimination of nuclear weapons.
|
| Unnamed Prime Minister | Prime Minister of a European country |
Told the author it was impossible to imagine the day their last nuclear weapon would be gone.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Iran's supreme council |
Mentioned in a hypothetical scenario regarding nuclear strategy.
|
Timeline (1 events)
April 2009 (Implied)
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Discussed as an adversary pursuing nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
Discussed as a dangerous adversary.
|
|
|
Location where Obama gave a speech ('Did you see them cheering in Prague?').
|
|
|
Location of the unnamed Prime Minister mentioned in the text.
|
Relationships (2)
Grouped together as committed to eliminating nuclear weapons.
Grouped together as committed to eliminating nuclear weapons.
Key Quotes (3)
"Obama said: ‘We have to insist, yes, we can.’"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499.jpg
Quote #1
"What could be more encouraging to Iran than the idea that they will be getting into the nuclear business just as we are getting out?"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499.jpg
Quote #2
"I was once told by the prime minister of an important country in Europe that it was all but impossible to imagine the day when their last nuclear weapon would"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,086 characters)
13
Far more worrying, however, than the effect on friends and allies of the utopian excursion toward global zero is the effect of such thinking on such dangerous adversaries as Iran and North Korea. Is there any reason to believe that our embrace of that goal will discourage them from the vigorous pursuit of nuclear weapons? What could be more encouraging to Iran than the idea that they will be getting into the nuclear business just as we are getting out? Imagine Iran’s supreme council meeting to discuss whether to continue the costly pursuit of nuclear weapons. “But what is the point of building these weapons?” asks a skeptical mullah. “We will have one or two and the Americans have thousands.” Another replies: “Yes, but the Americans have declared their intention to eliminate nuclear weapons entirely. They say they have already started down that road. Shultz, Kissinger, Perry, Nunn, and even Obama himself are committed. Obama said: ‘We have to insist, yes, we can.’ Did you see them cheering in Prague? And when they have started getting rid of theirs, our small arsenal will not seem so puny.”
Of course, proponents of global zero will say that we would never give up our last nuclear weapons if the Iranians (by that point having long ago acquired and stockpiled them) did not do the same. This argument comes close to saying the goal of global zero is a mere mirage, which leaves one wondering what benefits can be claimed for chasing it or pretending to believe it is real. International politics is played out in near real time, and the influence of future events, like future earnings, is deeply discounted by prudent officials. But one important point remains: as our nuclear capabilities dwindle, the value of even a few nuclear weapons rises (toward the end of these parallel processes, exponentially). This puts a burden on trust and verification that they simply cannot bear. I was once told by the prime minister of an important country in Europe that it was all but impossible to imagine the day when their last nuclear weapon would
Of course, proponents of global zero will say that we would never give up our last nuclear weapons if the Iranians (by that point having long ago acquired and stockpiled them) did not do the same. This argument comes close to saying the goal of global zero is a mere mirage, which leaves one wondering what benefits can be claimed for chasing it or pretending to believe it is real. International politics is played out in near real time, and the influence of future events, like future earnings, is deeply discounted by prudent officials. But one important point remains: as our nuclear capabilities dwindle, the value of even a few nuclear weapons rises (toward the end of these parallel processes, exponentially). This puts a burden on trust and verification that they simply cannot bear. I was once told by the prime minister of an important country in Europe that it was all but impossible to imagine the day when their last nuclear weapon would
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023499
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document