Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

New York Times ^ | April 5, 2010 | DAVID E. SANGER and PETER BAKER

[lbryce]

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Monday that he was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons, even in self defense.

But the president said in an interview that he was carving out an exception for “outliers like Iran and North Korea” that have violated or renounced the main treaty to halt nuclear proliferation.

Discussing his approach to nuclear security the day before formally releasing his new strategy, Mr. Obama described his policy as part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions. To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary.

Mr. Obama’s strategy is a sharp shift from those adopted by his predecessors and seeks to revamp the nation’s nuclear posture for a new age in which rogue states and terrorist organizations are greater threats than traditional powers like Russia and China.

It eliminates much of the ambiguity that has deliberately existed in American nuclear policy since the opening days of the Cold War. For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons, or launched a crippling cyberattack.

Those threats, he argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options” -- a combination of old and newly designed conventional weapons.

“I’m going to preserve all the tools that are necessary in order to make sure that the American people are safe and secure,” Mr. Obama said during the interview in the Oval Office.

[Category Four]

Actually, I think if Pc2S, Sarkozy would (unlike the Empty Suit) come through for France, or so it seems to me ... we are all French now, I wish.

[TheWriterTX]

That is correct. The tritium in many of our warheads is failing, and needs to be replaced with weapons grade tritium. Clinton made sure there were insufficient quantities to maintain our stockpile; hence, the "arms reduction" push.

Then again, Bush had a chance to change that course and didn't do it, either.

[Soothesayer]

“When can we impeach this guy?”

When we run out of libtard citizens.

[penelopesire]

Not sure about your last statement regarding the Bush NPR. Much of it was classified, but in a copy that can be found on the internet, they state under the heading, ‘Infrastructure’, that they intend to bring our remaining nuclear warheads up to snuff(to paraphrase). I am assuming that that would include what you mentioned, but not sure. Not sure we can be sure if so much of the report was classified.

Here it is if you are interested:

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/8039.pdf

[penelopesire]

Also found this from the Bush NPR that seems to answer the question pretty clearly:

“Other Component and Material Production:... Tritium production, halted since 1988, is programmed to resume in FY03 with first deliveries to the stockpile scheduled for FY06. Additionally, warhead refurbishment plans require modern facilities at Y-12’s Special Materials Complex for manufacturing unique materials.” (p. 14)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gIXsR4V9-hUJ:www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/npr.htm+President+Bush’s+nuclear+posture+review&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

So where did you get the idea that President Bush did not address this problem?

[omega4179]

[TheWriterTX]

Dear Penelope:

I've got it on my other computer, but I pulled a bunch of articles on tritium production a few months ago when Bambi talked about rolling out Start III. I had followed it and a number of other national security issues closely during the Clinton Administration, but throttled back during Bush Administration to spend more time with family.

There was a huge flap during the Clinton administration's plans to use civilian facilities to produce tritium (billed as a cost-savings move, but the Enviros went bananas).

We needed to ramp up substantially to maintain our current stockpile. Bush, if I remember correctly, kept us on the "established" path, which had the overall effect of phasing out a shockingly large portion of our stockpile due to obsolescence in 2012.

When I get back on my home computer, I'll link those reports up.

[TheWriterTX]

Page 45 of the NPR actually talks about envisioning a world without nuclear weapons. Haven't read all 72 pages yet, but this title alone tells me everything I need to know.

This POS is a threat to our country.

[penelopesire]

OK. I look forward to reading the info when you get it pulled together. If I don’t get to it tonight, I will in the morning. I didn’t worry about such things when Bush was President because I knew he wasn’t going to endanger our overall national security..but now with Zero...all bets are off.

[TheWriterTX]

Same here. Only tracked it once and a while during Bush.

The Teleprompter is a lunatic! Check out page 45 of the report, and have a strong drink nearby. This is ridiculous!

It talks repeatedly about arms reduction and non-proliferation treaties, but the largest proliferator in the WORLD, China, is openly shipping nuke parts to Iran, an open enemy of the US.

Insidious.

[Liberty Valance]

[reader25]

So very true.

[M. Espinola]

By the Obamatrons...

[seoul62]

Same feeling.