Skip to comments.Obama Plans Major Shifts to Reduce Nuclear Arsenal
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 nations aging nuclear arsenal the stuff of that deterrence. Foreign nations, friend and foe, are poised to discover Obamas 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 ...
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.
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.
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.
Folks Rev Wright taught him our nuclear weapons are evil The American people awere so foolish electing this joker.
The Saudi-owned president begins destroying the USA right out of the shoots.
His plan is for “minimal” protection. Sound wise?
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.
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.
I feel so safe already. Not!
The America-hater will make Carter and Clinton look like boy scouts when it comes to ruining our national defense deterrent.
(you say “domonish”, I say “diminish”, LOL)
ah- nuclear deterrence
maybe we have finally found a subject at which the strategic community organizer excels
Sad. The Obamaloon couldn’t pass a freshman physics course and he’s gonna tell us how to regulate our weapons stash.
I’ll take a couple off his hands.
That’s why I don’t mind saying it.
I am NOT a Republican!
As long as he leaves us with enough nukes to blow up the entire World once, I’m OK with it.
WE ARE SO BONED!
“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?
Ah, let’s not insult the Boy Scouts.
So, does that mean they are allowed for terrorist purposes?
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.
Did you perchance mean “chute”?
Because throwing away the best deterrent system ever conceived makes us somehow safer. [/s]
Lee Harvey Oswald, pick up the white courtesy phone. Lee Harvey Oswald......
“So, does that mean they are allowed for terrorist purposes? “
Seven days in May—not so farfetched anymore.
We’ll get a good republican president to rebuild new American cities; the radioactive rubble of the old ones will be uninhabitable.
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.
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 Obamas 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.
“— just ominous enough to do the job of deterrence.”
Why even that much? Nobody actually believes he would use them,,,under any circumstances whatsoever.
“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.
Actually, I looked up “out of the shoots” before posting
and found an Irish precedent, but what does a Guinness-filled blogger know?
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 cant sing traditional music better than this. \
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.
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.