Posted on 05/27/2008 11:33:03 AM PDT by pissant
2005 - nuclear Bunker Busters canceled
2007 - reduction of nuclear arsenal
Do I like this? Heck NO! I advocate the United States using and maintaining it's strength and deterrence. But for the sake of intellectual honesty, don't act as if this is some McCain crock.
Neither did I compare anyone, nor did I condone the reduction of our nuclear arsenal. I merely pointed out that it’s neither new, nor particular to McCain. You act as if McCain is an crazy oddball with these ideas. Accurately all post-cold war Presidents are.
It’s a crock, and McCain’s selling it.
The fact that it’s Bush’s crock initially doesn’t change the crock-nature of it.
I’ve been saying for months now that Bush gave us McCain. Bush paved the way for McCain.
Bush, by caving on every conservative issue except Iraq, made McCain possible.
I’m starting to doubt what we’re doing in Iraq. If we’re so freakin’ busy transforming ourselves into a UN-lackey socialist nation, what good does it do us to bleed and die in Iraq?
What are we fighting for?
George W. Bush is not running for another 4 years. I rip him retroactively, okay?
Well Bush was wrong and I made a serious mistake in voting for him. I’m not going to make a similar mistake again.
First, I fail to understand why we’d truly(*) get rid of bunker-busters. Such would eliminate any realistic hope of hitting hardened assets in NoKo and elsewhere, which (assets), if NOT thus destroyed, could kill millions.
(*- I COULD see McCain simply fibbing. “I’ll SAY I’m going to get rid of them, during the campaign ... but then I won’t get rid of them, if elected.” Could be a rope-a-dope to make HillObama move even FURTHER to the wacky left on defense issues.)
I don’t know much about the quality and quantity of our nuke arsenal, so I can’t rule it out just because McCain says “let’s cut some.” It’s possible that we have some decrepit elements in that arsenal that are better off retired, with the plutonium being recycled into SLBMs or other more-survivable uses.
Nukes are like public parks: generally I like having them — a LOT of them. But it’s at least possible sometimes to have too many.
The time for these decisions was in the primaries. If you can live with Obama or Hillary as President, do as you plan.
Hey, even I don’t know everything! Besides, that’s Obama’s department! :)
Don’t beleive everything in the press. McCain knows it is still alive, hence the call for its abandonment.
http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jid/jid051117_1_n.shtml
That's incorrect. Development of nuclear bunker busters was halted. There are non-nuclear bunker busters, which are being further developed.
OT (sorta) but: Isn’t it head-shakingly awful when the lefties call Bush 43 “far right”? Are they freakin’ kidding us? Bush spends like Nixon on a crack binge. Other than the war, Roberts and Alito, he hasn’t been conservative on much, let alone “far right.”
What a damned fool.
HOWEVER...
I would only support it if it also came with taking the savings and putting them into a significant increase in our conventional forces and the completion of very serious conventional bunker busters, new ground force hardware and many more active troops among other things.
Conventional forces that can fight and dominate in several theaters at the same time will be a part of a successful 21st military for the US. It is cool to say “nuke ‘em”, but the reality is it does not leave much for us to work with after the win. Radiation makes it hard to drill for oil or sell goods, and dead customers are bad for business...
Of course that is not what McCain has suggested. A democrat would not think that way, he would want to put the savings in lovely gifts to foreign dictators and such. And of course Russia and China have Nuclear non proliferation at the top of their lists I'm sure...
Thanks for the clarification. My position is the same, though (I fail to understand why we’d unilaterally halt ANY bunker-buster development, nuclear or not).
Don't tell me. You believe the press reports that fit you version, don't you? No need for patronizing. The report I linked was sourcing official (and no anonymous) White House persons. The other link I posted was from the White House itself.
minor correction: Domenici was the source of the second link, the first was the White House.
Personally, I am for cutting the number of nuclear weapons and spending more on a standing army. Boosting the number of soldiers and hardware being purchased. Our standing army is stretched... if war broke out with Iran, do we have the current # soldiers/marines for Iraq, Iran,and Afghanistan?
It has been shown before that we have far more nuclear weapons than we need.
Other than the war, Roberts and Alito, he hasn’t been conservative on much, let alone “far right.”Yup.
I may have just gotten a reason for just staying home this November...........
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.