Main Edition
US
FR
October 9, 2024 - 4:45pm
Donald Trump has called for the elimination of all nuclear weapons, including for the US, during an interview today with comedian Andrew Schulz.
The former president told Schulz he had nearly reached a deal with China and Russia while in office to eliminate nuclear weapons within all three countries, which would have eventually applied to other nuclear powers.
“We were close to a deal for getting rid of nuclear weapons. It would be so good,” Trump said. “I’m talking about Russia, ourselves and China. We would then bring everyone else into it.”
The comments came during a discussion of Joe Biden’s handling of relations with Iran, as Trump criticised the White House incumbent’s reluctance to take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Nuclear weapons, the Republican candidate said, are “the biggest threat we have in the world today”, adding: “it’s not global warming, where the oceans are rising 1/8 of an inch in the next 500 years.”
Throughout Trump’s initial 2016 campaign and his time in office, his critics frequently cited the risk of nuclear war as a primary reason why he shouldn’t be in office, pointing to his unpredictability as a risk factor. Those fears were amplified when, in 2018, Trump taunted Kim Jong Un on Twitter, writing: “Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”
Despite his provocative comments to world leaders, Trump has campaigned as a dove on foreign policy, frequently boasting throughout his 2024 campaign that there were no new wars involving the US during his presidency. Earlier this week, he told conservative commentator Ben Shapiro that his foreign policy was “peace through strength”, adding: “I’m not an isolationist. I helped a lot of countries. I kept countries out of war.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“We were close to a deal for getting rid of nuclear weapons. It would be so good,” Trump said. “I’m talking about Russia, ourselves and China. We would then bring everyone else into it.”
: “I’m not an isolationist. I helped a lot of countries. I kept countries out of war.”
I don’t see how this can be a bad idea. All that has happened since we introduced nuclear weapons is a massive arms race to make more and more, in more and more places.
This could reduce geopolitical tensions in a number of places and save an enormous sum of money for the countries that are nuclear powers. I think it’s actually a very good idea.
US foreign policy does need a massive overhaul, seems Mr Trump is prepared to do things a bit differently. Whether russia and China would agree is another question.
Nuclear weapons are what prevented the cold war going hot and becoming World War III, they are an effective way to deter enemy from attacking you. If we did not have them war would be more wide spread and frequent.
That’s a nice, and commonly held, theory but difficult to prove.
You must be joking?
What about ww1 and ww2?
Where there any nukes involved?
Trump’s claim about closing a deal with China and Russia is absurd. No state with nuclear weapons will abandon them unless they possess a superior conventional force. Why do you think Russia repeatedly threatens to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine?
Well it’s a nice thought anyway.
I think you would need all of your optimism to believe it will happen.
It’s better than him saying America needs more nukes and more war anyway.
They aren’t too good at war at the moment, playing nuclear brinkmanship with Russia hasn’t really gone that well.
Your last question is really an answer why Trump idea is nonsense because it can not happen.
Reducing tension?
I am sorry but we had wars for millenia without nukes.
Especially big ones like ww1 and ww2.
I don’t disagree. I must have been full of optimism when I wrote that.
I think we aren’t far off another big war really, the middle east is in rather a pickle now, I’m uncertain as to what will happen in Ukraine and the US can’t decide if it wants to fight China or not, sounds like America can’t decide what it wants do really. War, no war, get rid of the nukes, peace flags, who knows what will happen.
Maybe we could go back to having wars without the nukes again?
Has anyone got numbers on that? As in nuclear war casualties vs bow and arrow casualties? Or nuke vs g*ns casualties? Nuke vs catapults?
I feel like it’s hard to say whether the old ways would kill less people or not.
I’ve always felt that Trump was a peacenik at heart. His instincts are for making deals, negotiating from power but not actually striking. His first term speaks for itself – no major wars, dialogue with enemies, de-escalation.
Now, after nearly 4 years of the war hawks Blinken and Nuland, look where we are.
I would agree with your summary on his first term and the lack of wars but can you believe anything he says. The Emperor has no clothes. He is quite a peculiar loony really.
Does it really matter what Donald Trump says? Words are abstract. They don’t mean anything in the real world. Actions are what matters. What people do, not what they say.
All true.
However his idea of nuclear disarmament is bonkers (assuming he was not misquoted).
You can not uninvent technologies and how would you prove that no one is cheating?
Being worried about nuclear weapons is common sense. Seeing global nuclear disarmament as a solution is somewhat fantastical. For Trump to claim that he almost had a deal with both China and Russia to eliminate all three countries’ nuclear weapons… well, that’s something else.
The truth about Donald Trump is more complicated than most people want to admit. On the one hand, he’s a bullshitter who often acts like an overgrown child. On the other hand, he has good instincts and a level of patriotism and respect for his base that most politicians lack. So at the end of the day, I’m a Trump supporter – I’ve voted for him twice and I plan to do so a third time, since I think he is more likely than his opponent to roll back administrative tyranny at home and keep the US out of new wars. But it isn’t an unqualified admiration, and I’ve written about my mixed feelings repeatedly on my own substack:
https://twilightpatriot.substack.com/p/why-trump-succeeded-where-others
https://twilightpatriot.substack.com/p/fear-courage-the-fourth-of-july-and
I am far from a peacenik at any time and have been in two wars. I do not believe that unilateral nuclear disarmament is possible. I do think that any reduction in the world’s stockpiles of these evil things is the most important issue of our time- more than climate change, more than anything.
So, while Mr Trump may not have used the right terms, this discussion must be held. And if his words start this process, we should all be grateful.
There are a few more than five nuclear states. Trump can’t count very well.
What astounds me is that people still consider anything Trump says as a serious policy proposal. He has a long history of saying whatever he thinks people want to hear at the time, with no interest in following through. He said he was going to get rid of Obamacare and replace it with some wonderful new plan, the details of which were perpetually just around the corner. He said he was going to get rid of the national debt over two terms, and went massively in the other direction even before Covid. He said he was going to rebuild infrastructure. Why should anyone believe he has anything like the interest and engagement needed to follow through on something of this scope and complexity (even though it’s a good idea in itself)?
Trump doesn’t have a monopoly on empty promises. Yet he opposes net zero and open borders. I’m very confident he will deliver on both of those. Harris, on the other hand, not so much. That’s good enough for me.
Trump lies.
Nice publicity stunt. Russia and China will never eliminate their nuclear weapons, neither will the US. Besides there are several other countries with nukes including India, Pakistan, France, UK, North Korea, Israel and a few others who either are capable or on the verge.
So? Once you no longer need mad what point do they have. I wonder how small a nuclear arsenal the us has currently?
The United States has a nuclear arsenal of something like 5,428. The question is, just how many are really needed? Once you’ve fired off, say 100, what’s left to require 5,328?
Spares?…
Judging by the self professed quality of spares these days, you may need a great number.
Gorbachev suggested this and Reagan nearly went for it, but Thatcher persuaded him otherwise.
This time, Starmer can send Lammy.
‘We were close to a deal for getting rid of nuclear weapons. It would be so good,” Trump said.’
Politicians usually try to make their lies believable, I guess Trump can no longer be bothered with that.
Do you honestly believe Harris will support fracking and shut down mass migration?
This isn’t an article about Harris, and my comment was noting that other politicians make their lies believable, not that they don’t lie.
I literally laughed out loud when I read Trump had said that. It’s absurd. I know he gets a lot of rubbish said about him, as the article points out, but that doesn’t mean you should let him have a free pass when he says something as ridiculous as that.
That’s fair. All I’m saying is Trump doesn’t have a monopoly on empty promises or even lies. Anything Harris says about the border is just as fantastical. I guess I’m guilty of whataboutism.
Donald Trump knows he’s exaggerating. That’s the point of it. He’s putting on a show. That’s his shtick, and he sticks to his shtick. He calls it “truthful hyperbole”, and he has mastered the art of it. He’s made it a genre, like farce or satire. More Ciceronian than Cicero.
I know it grates on some people, but it’s like Bobby Kennedy’s raspy voice to me. I’ve gotten so used to it that I don’t hear it anymore. That let’s me focus on what really matters, which in the case of nuclear weapons is that we try to get a better handle on the problem if we can.
When I was young I remember a chilling graphic novel by Raymond Briggs called When the Wind Blows, later made into an animated movie. People used to worry about nuclear winter and the end of the world. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists got attention. Not any more. We seem to have moved on.
Maybe it is time to go back to the topic.
“Donald Trump knows he’s exaggerating”
He’s lying, plain and simple. And the rubes will buy it like you always do…
Sure, call it lying. The point is, so what if Donald Trump lies? Does it matter?
People lie all the time. When I ask my wife, “how do I do look?”, does she say “fat, old and ugly”? Of course not. She lies: “you look great!” I used to do a lot of negotiations, and I lied all the time. Not fraudulently, of course, but I lied nonetheless. So did those I negotiated with.
People need to recognize the old adage “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” is true. Criticize Donald Trump for what he does (or doesn’t) do, not for what he says. Abstractions don’t matter.
I am very glad that I never had to negotiate with you. You say that you “lied all the time” and you seem to be proud of it!!
Trump is a consummate salesman and conman. 99% of Trump’s supporters don’t know what “Ciceronian” means and take his bullshit literally. Yes, the danger of nuclear weapons is a critical issue, to be taken up by serious people not fools.
Objective truth is alien concept to Trump, the meaning of such a thing is impossible for him to grasp. Everything is about narrative with him.
Carlos Danger makes a good point. In case you missed it, everything is about narrative with everyone, even your comment.
And I reject your narrative.
Seems like it would be a waste. We should use them up first and then just not buy any more.
The world’s biggest, baddest and possibly last Fireworks show?
Auction them off and get rid of the debt. Probably resolve the Middle East problem.
Reminds me of Randy Newman’s song Political Science:
” It would be so good” Lol
Well done donald
10:20, BBC Four, Threads. Only the fourth time that it has ever been shown, and quite possibly the last. Don’t miss it.
‘and quite possibly the last.’
Do you know something we don’t?
Oh how cute, look, he’s crying for attention again!
And you couldn’t help biting.
And he probably means it.
The world has been conducting itself so far as if there are no nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have become last ditch weapons for countries that possess them facing existential threats. So nuclear disarmament will pose bigger problems for states which are not as well armed as, say, the US. With a well developed delivery system nuclear weapons bring about a more level playing field for those states.
When it comes to name recognition, Donald Trump surpasses where Muhammad Ali, the Beatles and Elvis were in their lifetimes. The fact that he said he had effective discussions about nuclear disarmament with Russia and China is a turning point. It doesn’t matter if he made it up, dreamt it or it’s factual. The point is he’s saying it publicly. And will no doubt continue to do so.
I’m sure every politician everywhere would say the same thing. It’s a unicorn of course
I don’t hear other politicians saying it.
So you don’t think that The Donald will achieve World Peace within 24 hours of re-election?
“They have five countries now that have capability”
My god, the man is dumb. There’s at least 8 countries with nuclear capability and possibly more. This is known by anyone with enough IQ to cross the street without assistance – so I suppose that rules out the MAGA king.
The utter humiliation of the people who support him must be unbearable – how do you people do it?