I dont want to stifle some of the arguments here, but my original problem was Bush supporting the development of NEW Nuclear Weapons. Its been noted before that the current global stockpile could destroy the earth 10 times. IMO, thats certainly enough to maintain MAD. Money spent on new Nuclear Weapons now could be much more effectively spent elsewhere...if you want to keep it in context of defense, then how about our stumbling missle defense program.

Like I said, full disarmament is an ideal (a blind one currently). The important question is why we need NEW/MORE Nuclear Weapons?