Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Plans Major Shifts to Reduce Nuclear Arsenal
Newmax.com ^ | 2/16/09 | Dave Eberhart

Posted on 02/18/2009 1:11:39 PM PST by mojitojoe

If he has his way, President Barack Obama will dramatically change the nuclear weapons policy of the U.S. – leaving behind Cold War doctrine and looking to a model of a minimal nuclear arsenal -- just ominous enough to do the job of deterrence. Obama may be mired in the economic stimulus debate, but the clock is also relentlessly ticking on some volatile policy decisions regarding the nation’s aging nuclear arsenal – the stuff of that deterrence. Foreign nations, friend and foe, are poised to discover Obama’s nuclear agenda, while some critics within the U.S. are fearful that the new president will go too far, too fast.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: appeasement; bho2009; coldwar2; democrats; dhimmicrats; kissinger; nuclear; obama; russia; surrendercrats
Among the weighty decisions on the president’s plate is whether to extend or renegotiate the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START II) with Russia, which run outs at the end of 2009, and whether to press for ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) -- with which the U.S. only voluntarily complies, according to a report in USA Today.

The CTBT bans all nuclear explosions in all environments, for military testing or civilian purposes.

“This is not just a decision about the future of U.S. nuclear weapons, but about how the United States will address the challenges of … nuclear terrorism, nuclear proliferation and our entire 21st-century nuclear strategy,” Clark Murdock, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told USA Today.

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_nuclear_policy/2009/02/16/182362.html

1 posted on 02/18/2009 1:11:39 PM PST by mojitojoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

When the Chinese and the Soviets nuke us into the stone age . . . please remember this “leader” of ours and his decisions.

We are going to pay.


2 posted on 02/18/2009 1:16:13 PM PST by Jonathan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
Remember folks, the KEYSTONE of the Obama/Ayers Doctrine is to weaken our military defenses and to malign and demoralize our precious troops.

.

3 posted on 02/18/2009 1:16:22 PM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

We’re boned if something happens during his term. However this may be something of a mixed blessing, when we get a good republican president back in we’ll start updating our arsenal.

a third of the missles with ten times the firepower.


4 posted on 02/18/2009 1:16:22 PM PST by utherdoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

OMG.

Folks Rev Wright taught him our nuclear weapons are evil The American people awere so foolish electing this joker.


5 posted on 02/18/2009 1:17:23 PM PST by Williams (It's The Policies, Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

The Saudi-owned president begins destroying the USA right out of the shoots.


6 posted on 02/18/2009 1:17:52 PM PST by Veto! (Opinions freely dispensed as advice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

bookmark


7 posted on 02/18/2009 1:17:57 PM PST by GOP Poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

His plan is for “minimal” protection. Sound wise?


8 posted on 02/18/2009 1:18:21 PM PST by Williams (It's The Policies, Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Veto!

Don’t forget the Sec of State is Saudi and Chinese owned as well, but it would be too impolite for any republicans to say it.


9 posted on 02/18/2009 1:19:27 PM PST by Williams (It's The Policies, Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
As I continually assert, the Left is eager to domonish absolutely any aspect of American life and government that represents traditional definitions of strength.
Energy? Limit it (using "carbon footprints" as an excuse).
Military? Cut funding, cut troop numbers (and call it cuts in federal employment, as Clinton did), and cut benefits (I read that insurance benefits for veterans are about to get hit next).
Economy? Spend, spend, spend, and tax, tax, tax. Not exactly a recipe for a vibrant and healthy economy. (The Left tells us that it's okay, the benevolent government will use that money to "help people"... but again, that is not a traditional definition of national strength.)
Steadfastness in the face of enemies? As usual, the Left defaults to talk, talk, talk rather than shows of strength when foreign leaders like Kim Jong Il, Admenijad, and Saddam get/got in the mood to preen (and in the case of Kim Jong Il, we've established a pattern of placating him with money and food and technology... only to wait for the next time he wants to act up and get some more).

The Left does not want a strong America. They want a "fair" America... which means we have to reduce ourselves to the military, economic, and productivity levels of Belgium and Sweden... and they're doing their level best to obtain those, to me, rather clear goals.

10 posted on 02/18/2009 1:22:23 PM PST by Teacher317 (wo xue zhong wen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

I feel so safe already. Not!


11 posted on 02/18/2009 1:22:36 PM PST by AxelPaulsenJr (Please God Save The United States From The Democrats, and Barack Hussein Obama. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

The America-hater will make Carter and Clinton look like boy scouts when it comes to ruining our national defense deterrent.


12 posted on 02/18/2009 1:23:07 PM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317

(you say “domonish”, I say “diminish”, LOL)


13 posted on 02/18/2009 1:23:43 PM PST by Teacher317 (wo xue zhong wen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

ah- nuclear deterrence

maybe we have finally found a subject at which the strategic community organizer excels

s-a-r-c


14 posted on 02/18/2009 1:24:14 PM PST by silverleaf ("Men are not angered by mere misfortune but by misfortune conceived as injury" - Screwtape)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Sad. The Obamaloon couldn’t pass a freshman physics course and he’s gonna tell us how to regulate our weapons stash.


15 posted on 02/18/2009 1:25:08 PM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

I’ll take a couple off his hands.


16 posted on 02/18/2009 1:26:28 PM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

That’s why I don’t mind saying it.

I am NOT a Republican!


17 posted on 02/18/2009 1:27:31 PM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

As long as he leaves us with enough nukes to blow up the entire World once, I’m OK with it.


18 posted on 02/18/2009 1:28:27 PM PST by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

A55H@!!!!!

WE ARE SO BONED!


19 posted on 02/18/2009 1:28:29 PM PST by petro45acp (A government may create work, but only a free market creates jobs, careers, and growth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

“minimal protection” is always such an astute position for the leader of a nation to strive for in determining what will prevent people like Putin, Chia Pet, and Ahmadnutjob from even thinking about destroying tens of millions of American lives... don’t you think?


20 posted on 02/18/2009 1:28:32 PM PST by silverleaf ("Men are not angered by mere misfortune but by misfortune conceived as injury" - Screwtape)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Ah, let’s not insult the Boy Scouts.


21 posted on 02/18/2009 1:31:08 PM PST by rightinthemiddle (Without the Mainstream Media, the Left is Nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
The CTBT bans all nuclear explosions in all environments, for military testing or civilian purposes.

So, does that mean they are allowed for terrorist purposes?

22 posted on 02/18/2009 1:38:27 PM PST by AreaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Veto!

Saudi owned? I think it’s more like Syria, Iran, North Korea, Hezbollah, and Hamas owned. If you think Saudi Arabia is bad, just wait.

Their leader right now is seeking to enact religious change. Realizing the vitriolic Wasabbi sect’s desires, I think even he may see the need for change. I don’t think those other entities do or ever will.


23 posted on 02/18/2009 1:46:09 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Resolved: Gregg, McCain, Snowe, Spectre: 2010, Collins, Graham: 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Veto!

Did you perchance mean “chute”?


24 posted on 02/18/2009 1:47:46 PM PST by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Because throwing away the best deterrent system ever conceived makes us somehow safer. [/s]


25 posted on 02/18/2009 1:51:12 PM PST by ronnyquest ("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Lee Harvey Oswald, pick up the white courtesy phone. Lee Harvey Oswald......


26 posted on 02/18/2009 1:52:29 PM PST by texson66 (DemonRats: Remember: They have what it takes to TAKE WHAT YOU HAVE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AreaMan

“So, does that mean they are allowed for terrorist purposes? “

Yes.


27 posted on 02/18/2009 1:58:16 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (History does repeat itself. This is Ceasar and the Roman Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AreaMan
"So, does that mean they are allowed for terrorist purposes? "

Apparently.

28 posted on 02/18/2009 2:09:49 PM PST by ronnyquest ("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Seven days in May—not so farfetched anymore.


29 posted on 02/18/2009 2:12:55 PM PST by exit82 (The Obama Cabinet: There was more brainpower on Gilligan's Island.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: utherdoul

We’ll get a good republican president to rebuild new American cities; the radioactive rubble of the old ones will be uninhabitable.


30 posted on 02/18/2009 2:13:49 PM PST by henkster (0bamanomics: "I'll loan you all the money you need to get out of debt.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Cutting the military, cutting security, cutting nukes, cutting jobs and incomes. Just sign over the entire country to the Syrians and be done with it.


31 posted on 02/18/2009 2:19:57 PM PST by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

When President Barack Obama gets his way, he will dramatically change the nuclear weapons policy of the U.S. – leaving behind Cold War doctrine and looking to a model of a Self Assured Destruction (SAD)

This  will provide minimal deterrence while placating the hopes for change from John Lennon fans and Aquarians. Obama may push several more economic StickItToUs proposals that will ensure the clock moves fast forward relentlessly ticking toward volatile world in which the lone global policeman and bully by proxy will wither without a sufficient nuclear arsenal – that could provide deterrence. Foreign nations, friend and foe, are poised to deliver a knockout blow to the United States while trying to re-restablish themselves as global superpowers even though they lack the resources and more imortantly the will, they will never the less engage endless and useless rhetoric and mindless palaver.  Most nations know they will once again be at risk to regional and global war but they secretly wish Obama’s nuclear agenda, will absolutely be fastracked leaving the world without an example of freedom and the ability to forcibly bring freedom to savge throwback peoples and societies, who wish to remain in the seventh century.


32 posted on 02/18/2009 3:08:45 PM PST by Vendome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

“— just ominous enough to do the job of deterrence.”

Why even that much? Nobody actually believes he would use them,,,under any circumstances whatsoever.


33 posted on 02/18/2009 4:45:25 PM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonathan

“When the Chinese and the Soviets nuke us into the stone age . . . please remember this “leader” of ours and his decisions.”

Won`t matter a bit to him. He and his ilk will be on their way to another country to enjoy their foreign bank accounts before the bombs hit.


34 posted on 02/18/2009 4:51:30 PM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

Oh chute!

Actually, I looked up “out of the shoots” before posting
and found an Irish precedent, but what does a Guinness-filled blogger know?

http://my.liveireland.com/profiles/blogs/the-livies-2009

10. Vocal Album of the Year Maranna McCloskey At Last
This Derry singer establishes herself as the best of all, and straight out of the shoots on this winner. An alto of exquisite warmth and grasp of the tradition. You just can’t sing traditional music better than this. \


35 posted on 02/19/2009 8:19:08 AM PST by Veto! (Opinions freely dispensed as advice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
He's an American hater and he's doing everything he can to destroy our country. He's moving faster than I thought.
Getting everything in position for our big attack within his first 6 months.
36 posted on 02/19/2009 8:36:18 AM PST by sunny48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

You guys don’t know anything, even with a small portion of our nukes we are still capable of completely destroying any country, even Russia. Small numbers of technologically advanced ICBMs can do more than large numbers of antiquated ones, and with today’s technology there is no longer a need to maintain thousands of nukes like in the 60s in order to deter anyone.


37 posted on 02/19/2009 5:54:54 PM PST by Decombobulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson