Skip to comments.Obama's nuclear-free vision mired in debate
Posted on 01/04/2010 9:54:38 AM PST by BradtotheBone
Reporting from Washington - President 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, Czech Republic, last April, pledging that the U.S. would take dramatic steps to lead the way. Nine months later, the administration is locked in internal debate over a top-secret policy blueprint for shrinking the U.S. nuclear arsenal and reducing the role of such weapons in America's military strategy and foreign policy.
Officials in the Pentagon and elsewhere have pushed back against Obama administration proposals to cut the number of weapons and narrow their mission, according to U.S. officials and outsiders who have been briefed on the process.
In turn, White House officials, unhappy with early Pentagon-led drafts of the blueprint known as the Nuclear Posture Review, have stepped up their involvement in the deliberations and ordered that the document reflect Obama's preference for sweeping change, according to the U.S. officials and others, who described discussions on condition of anonymity because of their sensitivity and secrecy.
The Pentagon has stressed the importance of continued U.S. deterrence, an objective Obama has said he agrees with. But a senior Defense official acknowledged in an interview that some officials are concerned that the administration may be going too far. He described the debate as "spirited. . . . I think we have every possible point of view in the world represented."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
lol. a debate with the real world.
We live in a more dangerous world than ever before, and what does O’Kenyan want to do? Disarm, unilaterally.
This guy is not one of us.
If it was going to be "so important" he should have been asked about it at every debate.
During the campaign, Obama said that the nuclear option was off the table for his administration in Afghanistan. Hillary said she was unwilling to make that same pledge.
Something like that
Just had a thought. You know that anyone who crosses the Clintons eventually ends up dead. Hillary’s problem is that she is several dead bodies away from the Presidency that was stolen from her.
What if a nuke took out downtown DC at just the monent when Obama, Biden, Pelosi, and Byrd were there? Everyone would assume that the muzzies did it. That would take one hell of a conspiracy to pull off, but never underestimate the Clintons.
With both houses of Congress and the Supremes dead, she would have ALL the power.
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.