![[image]](http://mowser.com/img?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2Fdemocracyarsenalorg%2Fimages%2FNSN_logo.png
){kind=logo}
![[image]](http://mowser.com/img?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracyarsenal.org%2Fdemocracyarsenalorg%2Fimages%2FDAheader_5.png)
Does Palin understand the meaning of deterrent?
Posted by The Editors
This is a post from NSN intern Eric Auner
Palin just said that nuclear weapons are currently being used as a deterrent. The only problem is that this was said in response to a question on the circumstances under which the weapons would actually be fired. The meaning of the deterrent is that they might, at some point, be fired. If you are unclear about what that point is, then the deterrent is meaningless.
I feel for Steve Biegun, this is not the first time Palin has mangled his talking points. The whole thing about Putin rearing his head in Russian airspace came from Biegun, too, but nobody knew what Palin was talking about then, either.
Posted by: Amyfw | October 03, 2008 at 09:39 AM