Skip to comments.Obama's vision of nuclear-free world drawing fire - Obama finds resistence on removing nukes
Posted on 12/31/2009 9:12:48 AM PST by a fool in paradise
...Obama's ambitious plan to begin phasing out nuclear weapons has run up against powerful resistance from officials in the Pentagon and other U.S. agencies, posing a threat to one of his most important foreign policy initiatives.
Obama laid out his vision of a nuclear-free world in a speech in Prague in April, vowing the U.S. would take dramatic steps to lead the way. Eight months later, the administration is locked in internal debate...
Officials in the Pentagon and elsewhere have pushed back against administration proposals to cut the number of weapons and narrow their mission....
The debate represents another collision between Obama's administration and key parts of the national security establishment, following earlier scrapes over troop levels in Afghanistan and missile defenses in eastern Europe...
Congress called for the nuclear review, the third such study since the end of the Cold War, and placed the Pentagon in charge. Similar reviews were conducted near the beginning of both the Clinton and the Bush administrations, but Obama's is the first in which substantial changes stand to be made both in the number of U.S. nuclear weapons and how they are used.
The government maintains an estimated 9,400 nuclear weapons, about 1,000 fewer than in 2002. But Obama believes that stepping up efforts to reduce the stockpile will give U.S. officials added credibility...
The timing of the administration debate is crucial, because a key international meeting on the treaty is planned for May in New York. Also looming next year are other elements of Obama's nuclear agenda, including renewal of an arms reduction treaty with Russia and a push for Senate ratification of a global ban on nuclear testing...
...was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in part because of expectations that he would make good on his pledge to reduce the nuclear threat...
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
The President certainly has a community organizers understanding of the nuclear issue.
Just part of his vision of an America free world.
What a moron. The inmates are running the asylum.
This is inane. It’s like trying to get rid of toasters or freezers.
When it comes to nuclear weps, the cat’s WAY out of the bag, and won’t be seen again.
Obama, the first two-year-old president. Obama’s world-view and political philosophy: Life is like a playground.
Maybe we should all wear party hats too! And can we have a piñata? Please???
Looks like much of Washington isn’t yet ready to put up the KICK ME sign.
What else would you expect of the Social Worker in Chief?
Incompetence and arrogance is running rampant in the White House.
Regarding your handle: if this is paradise, it’s one nasty surprise!
Regarding Hussein: how can we STOP him? All ideas welcome.
Oh great disarm us so we can’t protect ourselves that’s brilliant. Maybe we should give the chicoms all our weapons so they’ll love us more. Will some one please tell these people its not the 1960s.
“can we have a piñata? Please???”
It seems that they are enjoying the USA being the piñata.
I believe Sargosy straight out told Obama that we don’t live in a virtual world. In other words, he called him an -———.
The Stalinists in our midst scoffed at Senator Joe McCarthy and Roy Cohn when they suggested that there were communist sympathizers within the State Department and even in the US military.
The Left has long known that they can use the powers of unelected offices to dismantle the well-being of this nation.
Now a red diaper doper baby sits in the White House determined to do all of the damage he can do, through the courts and executive orders.
His “pledge” in Prague was boasting of something he does have the power to do. But then he is an usurper. He's said that he sees the Constitution as an obstacle, something that limits the powers of government keeping him (and others) from doing what they want to do. He mentioned in that interview how some of the restrictions in the Constitution can be challenged through the courts (judicial tyranny).
Kneecapping this nation will not result in a safer world, Barry.
Legal challenges. He is not serving in his capacity as Commander in Chief. He is not upholding his oath to protect and secure this nation.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Gut intuition says it is suicidal, but game analysts rely on more objective measures and evidence.
Any of you a**holes that elected this clown are to blame for the mess we’re in. You elected the Kenyan village idiot, gave him the keys to the car and a bottle of booze and hoped for the best. Many thanks for screwing all of us, you morons.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the sign of a deranged mind. We have "credibility" BECAUSE of our strategic forces.
Stupid liberals. Removing nukes will not work unless every single nuke on the planet plus the technology to make them is destroyed.
Pie-in-the-sky utopian ideals don’t work very well in the real world. I wish the libs could understand that simple fact.
Obama and his ilk think they can disagm us via neglect of our nuclear arsenal and research capacity.
We should be developing better nucs for special use..bunkers, EMP, Neutron, but no..we will let the Chinese get way ahead of us on those features, helped by Chinese spies.
Doe anyone know if the U.S. military has the option of refusing an order from the CIC if it endangers the U.S Security.
If this is such a KEY agenda item for him and something he reportedly pledged in his 2008 scampaign, why wasn’t there a single debate question about his plan to erridate America’s nuclear arsenal?
Oh that’s right, the liberals ran the show, there was no conservative led debate. I say seat a debate panel as you would a jury panel, both “teams” choose and reject persons for the “bench”.
I wonder if the “new” offensive weapons of the Russians will be nuclear? Obama probably thinks they are just big cherry bombs!
Somebody in the CIA or FBI or another government organization or even the Mossad has to have info on Barry’s background. I fervently hope that some Patriot will release this info sooner rather than later.
I dont get it. If Superman was able to do it in Superman IV, then why cant Obama?
General James Mattoon Scott: I think the signing of a nuclear disarmament pact with the Soviet Union is at best an act of naÔvetÈ, and at worst an unsupportable negligence. We've stayed alive because we've built up an arsenal, and we've kept the peace because we've dealt with an enemy who knew we would use that arsenal. And now we're asked to believe that a piece of paper will take the place of missile sites and Polaris submarines, and that an enemy who hasn't honored one solemn treaty in the history of its existence will now, for our convenience, do precisely that. I have strong doubts, gentlemen.
General James Mattoon Scott: And if you want to talk about your oath of office, I'm here to tell you face to face, President Lyman, that you violated that oath when you stripped this country of its muscles - when you deliberately played upon the fear and fatigue of the people and told them they could remove that fear by the stroke of a pen. And then when this nation rejected you, lost faith in you, and began militantly to oppose you, you violated that oath by not resigning from office and turning the country over to someone who could represent the people of the United States.
The idiot-in-chief is going to get us all killed.
Wow, I remember that scene.
I hope it is not fiction but the actual fact in this present day of danger to the Republic.
I fear it’s about to be true. We need a strong resistance to begin now.
Superman went on two dates with two different women at the same time in Superman IV as well.
Everyone else wants BHO to phase out OUR nukes. And BHO stands with just about anyone else.
He’s a red diaper doper baby who was not raised in this country. He has no love for America. Plain to see.
Just wanted to get my daily quote in: “Obama is the worst president in history”, there my deed is done for the day.
I.e., he has already issued...without any Congressional oversight disclosures or hearings,... some Executive Orders to dismantle our deterrent arsenal...and been confronted by those who are unwilling to recognize clearly treasonous orders as legitimate.
What debate? This despot doesn't need no 'stinkin debate. Remember how much "debate" he allowed over his auto industry takeover? His Stimulus bill? His health care takeover? And remember his position on AGW, how the time for "debate is over" as the "science is in..."
And what debate on Copenhagen? Note how Gibbs called concluding that Mann's fraudulence implicated further that the support for AGW was weak, "silly". Well for those who actually read and know about science, a lot of it is in, but it does not support the marxists for concluding in AGW. And Obama does not appear to be interested in hearing about the science...or any debate...on anything for that matter. He is a Marxist leftist...and leftists don't want to be bothered with facts, their minds are made up.
Just like it is about nuclear defense. He made up his mind that missile defense was a waste, so he has been slashing it. He made up his mind that we are to blame somehow for all the other people in the world seeking nukes, and if we just go naked...well...we will encourage them to do the right thing.
What they will do, and promptly after our deterrent is gone, is nuke us.
But of course, in Obama's view...we deserve it.
And as for that "oathe of office thing" that is just for kids.
Clinton Demurs On Obama’s Nuclear Stance
She Says It Is Unwise to Rule Out Using the Arms Against Terrorists
By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 3, 2007
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton drew another distinction between herself and Sen. Barack Obama yesterday, refusing to rule out the use of nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden or other terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Clinton’s comments came in response to Obama’s remarks earlier in the day that nuclear weapons are “not on the table” in dealing with ungoverned territories in the two countries, and they continued a steady tug of war among the Democratic presidential candidates over foreign policy.
Just BS the world into believing we have reduced the number of missiles Obama...the same way you BS the world into believing your economic recovery package was effective.
It’s a religion to him to see the US disarmed. We have to maintain our nuclear arsenal. One way to downsize is to let the numbers dwindle through atrophy.
And Democrats wonder why people think they are weak on defense.
Great thought. The formerly mainstream media will deny any embarrassing truth, but I’d still like to know it.
Good luck relocating. Wish we could join you. Too many responsibilities.
Gotta go to supper. Take care.
...from officials in the Pentagon and other U.S. agencies, posing a threat to one of his most important foreign policy initiatives... Congress called for the nuclear review, the third such study since the end of the Cold War, and placed the Pentagon in charge. Similar reviews were conducted near the beginning of both the Clinton and the Bush administrations, but Obama's is the first in which substantial changes stand to be made both in the number of U.S. nuclear weapons and how they are used. The government maintains an estimated 9,400 nuclear weapons, about 1,000 fewer than in 2002.Damn that warmonger Bush! ;') I loved this -- "one of his most important foreign policy initiatives" -- the only things in that category were things entirely in his control, such as stopping missile defense deployments in former Warsaw Pact countries which are now US allies, and that was something that hadn't yet happened.
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.