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

Skip to comments.

Analysis: Obama no-nukes pledge not so farfetched
AP on Yahoo ^ | 4/4/09 | Anne Gearan - ap

Posted on 04/04/2009 6:12:05 PM PDT by NormsRevenge

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's startling call Friday for a "world without nuclear weapons" brings to mind Ronald Reagan's idealistic, unfulfilled dream of eliminating the threat of nuclear annihilation.

...

Few experts think it's possible to completely eradicate nuclear weapons, and many say it wouldn't be a good idea even if it could be done...

"This idea of a nuclear weapons-free world isn't sort of pie in the sky," said Peter Crail, a nonproliferation analyst at the private Arms Control Association...

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: agenda; analysis; bho44; bhonukes; disarmament; nonukes; obama; pledge; weakling
ScareMonger , No , FearMonger at large.

If not atomic bombs, what then?

Internet bombs?

1 posted on 04/04/2009 6:12:05 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

US President Barack Obama (R) shakes hands with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during a meeting at the Winfield House, the US Ambassador's residence in London. Obama and Medvedev launched a milestone quest Wednesday to slash their nuclear arsenals, hoping to reverse the worst slump in the former foes' ties since the Cold War. (AFP/Saul Loeb)


2 posted on 04/04/2009 6:14:04 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Without nukes, it would be wise for Americans to learn Chinese, and be quick about it.

If conventional warfare is the only option, manufacturing might and population become key to any war’s outcome. It would appear that China would be holding those trump cards.


3 posted on 04/04/2009 6:15:26 PM PDT by brownsfan (Kool aid comes in two new flavors: Hope and Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Who needs nukes, Obama? We just sell you contaminated goods..
and buy your debt .. and wait..

US President Barack Obama shakes hands with his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao during their meetings at Winfield House -- the US ambassador's residence in London. Obama and Hu agreed to fight protectionism and work to improve military ties at their first face-to-face meeting. (AFP/Saul Loeb)


4 posted on 04/04/2009 6:16:01 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

“This idea of a nuclear weapons-free world isn’t sort of pie in the sky,”

Oh really, you going to be the one that turns yours in first?

When I heard the comment I wasn’t surprised. Just more of the same from someone who doesn’t know better, but ought to.


5 posted on 04/04/2009 6:17:39 PM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

THE U.S. IS SO SCREWED FOR ONLY GOD KNOWS EXACTLY HOW LONG!


6 posted on 04/04/2009 6:17:56 PM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Conservatives obey the rules. Leftists cheat. Who probably has the political advantage?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

These anti-nuke “experts” sure are going to be shocked when the muzzies set one off in their neighborhood.


7 posted on 04/04/2009 6:18:53 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (We're All Garbage Dump Bears Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

BO is living in a fantasy world.


8 posted on 04/04/2009 6:20:19 PM PDT by chippewaman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

You can always find an egghead to agree with you on any viewpoint you choose. NPR is the master at doing this; putting the desired spin on their adgenda through the words of some obscure prof. from Whatsamatta U. Fact: prohibition of any kind, once the genie is released is impossible. The only nation that will be w/o nuclear weapons will be the the US (with Obama as commander in chief). Why is anyone listening to this AP dribble?


9 posted on 04/04/2009 6:22:20 PM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Oh ppppuuuuuhhhhhh_llllllleeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Don’t put Obama’s naive, dare i say idiotic, idea in the same light as Reagan’s brilliant vision.


10 posted on 04/04/2009 6:23:54 PM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"This idea of a nuclear weapons-free world isn't sort of pie in the sky," said Peter Crail, a nonproliferation analyst at the private Arms Control Association.

LOL, what the heck is a 'nonproferation analyst' and who pays the bills for the Arms Control Association?

11 posted on 04/04/2009 6:28:20 PM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wita

You’re right... When bigger, more powerful Countries give up, or even drastically reduce their nuclear stockpiles... That is just going to make nuclear weapons much more desirable for smaller Countries and terrorist organizations. It will make nuclear weapons that much more valuable and relatively powerful. These people advocating a nuclear free world are idealistic fools that will put us at risk.


12 posted on 04/04/2009 6:30:13 PM PDT by CodeMasterPhilzar (I'll keep my money, my guns, and my freedom. You can keep the "change.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

When nukes are outlawed, only outlaws will have nukes.


13 posted on 04/04/2009 6:31:02 PM PDT by MAexile (Bats left, votes right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MAexile

Ruskies - we got rid of ours, did you get rid of yours?
Bammy - yep.
Ruskies - all of them?
Bammy - yep, all of them.
Ruskies - uh.. well, sorry comrade, you will surrender now. We still have some.


14 posted on 04/04/2009 6:33:08 PM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, Bowman later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.

In the world of no nukes....


15 posted on 04/04/2009 6:34:06 PM PDT by BenLurkin (And oh, Hey! I've been travelin' on this road too long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Um...


16 posted on 04/04/2009 6:35:13 PM PDT by sionnsar ((Iran Azadi | 5yst3m 0wn3d - it's N0t Y0ur5 (SONY) | "Also sprach Telethustra" - NonValueAdded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I hope we have nukes the first time that we discover a planet killer asteroid or comet on a collision course with earth.


17 posted on 04/04/2009 6:35:25 PM PDT by rednesss (fascism is the union,marriage,merger or fusion of corporate economic power with governmental power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chippewaman
BO is living in a fantasy world.


18 posted on 04/04/2009 6:39:51 PM PDT by Iron Munro (Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Few people imagine the atomic bomb as an evolving weapons system, but in truth, that is what it is.

The first nuclear bombs were designed to be dropped by aircraft, but almost immediately they had to be reconfigured for the new Nazi technology, the ballistic missile. Missiles had a long way to go before they could carry major payloads, though, so long range bombers were still essential.

Once the Rosenberg and other Soviet spy rings had stolen US technology, the evolution of nuclear weapons changed again. This was because the Russians were obsessed with weapons size. They kept building larger and larger bombs until they had built one that would pretty much destroy a continent.

The US went in the other direction, with both its missiles and its bombs getting smaller, yet more powerful, through miniaturization.

Yet on top of this both the US an Russia started building smaller and smaller bombs, some that could be put in an artillery shell, with explosive force only about double that of a high explosive round.

From that, the emphasis was on putting multiple warheads on a single missile, and getting more and more yield from less nuclear material.

But since the time of Richard Nixon, as much or more emphasis has been put on anti-missile defenses. A nuke only works if you can get it to its target. And since Ronald Reagan, such weapons have become so good that much of the world’s missiles would be destroyed anyway.

The current state is the development of directed energy weapons that can shoot down missiles long before they are a threat. So nuclear weapons are no longer the ultimate weapon.


19 posted on 04/04/2009 6:54:42 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Zero’s education in the real world will be costly for normal Americans.


20 posted on 04/04/2009 7:01:44 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (Si vis pacem, para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

You’re dreaming if you think we have a fool proof SDI system.


21 posted on 04/04/2009 7:10:22 PM PDT by Tolsti2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wita
“This idea of a nuclear weapons-free world isn’t sort of pie in the sky,”

That's all it is. There was a plausibility in the bipolar world of 1986, but that was a different world. Today there is no chance.

22 posted on 04/04/2009 7:11:06 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

It isn’t sort of. It’s absolutely!


23 posted on 04/04/2009 7:14:45 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Beat a better path, and the world will build a mousetrap at your door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

I don’t even see room for reductions talks anymore until there is satellite technology good enough to spot all nuclear devices regardless of whether they are poised on land or at sea, and everybody believes it. China cheats. Russia cheats.


24 posted on 04/04/2009 7:19:44 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Beat a better path, and the world will build a mousetrap at your door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
...and who pays the bills for the Arms Control Association?

The usual suspects...

Arms Control Association

Funding: ACA is supported by generous grants from the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the New-Land Foundation, the Ploughshares Fund, the Prospect Hill Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, and the Turner Foundation.

25 posted on 04/04/2009 7:35:48 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAItNSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Good old AP, communist to the core. No nukes is good for the US, but the rest of the world can have them!


26 posted on 04/04/2009 7:49:21 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Ruskies - we got rid of ours, did you get rid of yours?

Bammy - yep.

Ruskies - all of them?

Bammy - yep, all of them.

Ruskies - uh.. well, sorry comrade, you will surrender now. We still have some.

Bammy - Dang! Now, who were the idiots who convinced me to give up our ABM capability?

27 posted on 04/04/2009 7:57:39 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Conservatives allow the guilty to be executed but Lefties insist that the innocent be executed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tolsti2

My point was that even nuclear weapons evolve, and time, effort and energy not only goes into making them better, but in neutralizing them as well.

And credit where credit is due. W. Bush encircled Iran with some 300 Pac-3 missiles, integrated the Theater Air Defense (THAAD) with Israel’s ARROW anti-missile system, but also provided them with a loaner X-band, over the horizon, radar.

Nothings perfect, but it’s pretty darn good.


28 posted on 04/04/2009 8:04:07 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Obama: You job is a nuclear weapons free Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea FIRST ...

THEN work on the rest of the world.


29 posted on 04/04/2009 8:27:53 PM PDT by WOSG (Why is Obama trying to bankrupt America with $16 trillion in spending over the next 4 years?)
[ 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