If Russia wanted a U.S. president who would follow the Obama administration’s patterns of concessions and refusal to respond to Russian aggression, it would have been hoping for and preparing for a Hillary Clinton presidency.

The United States must pursue policies that ensure the U.S. nuclear deterrent is safe, reliable, and credible. Reserving the right to resume nuclear testing is one such means to maintain such a credible deterrent.

Not only is the United States morally justified to possess nuclear weapons and to credibly threaten their employment, it would be immoral and inimical to the principles of Christian just war theory for the U.S. government to adopt the disarmament agenda.

It’s a good exercise for world leaders to remember those horrific bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and to learn critical lessons from them. But the President and I disagree on the lessons to be learned.

In his remarks at Hiroshima, President Obama avoided delivering an outright apology for America’s use of atomic bombs to finally break the brutal war machine of Imperial Japan—a decision that won and ended a just war. Even so, the speech raises three unsettling issues.

The first visit to Hiroshima by a sitting US head of state reminds us that the end of war is peace

If one actually looks at the risks of nuclear war as well as the likelihood of proliferation at the start of the President’s term compared to now, the Obama’s nonproliferation record earns a failing grade. This becomes clear when one reflects on the Russian nuclear posture, the much ballyhooed Iran deal, and the situation in nuclear North Korea.

Does the brutal, provocative and nuclear-armed North Korean regime actually pose a threat to the United States?

Amid the plethora of security threats the world is facing today, North Korea, with its fourth nuclear test on Jan. 6, long-range missile test on Feb. 7 and firing of short range missiles in late March, has been doing all it can in order to ensure that it gets its share of attention.