Obama Proposes Radical Reduction in US Nuclear Arsenal - Big Big Forums

Jolie Rouge · 09-21-2009, 12:43 AM

Sunday, September 20, 2009
As Promised Obama Proposes Radical Reduction in US Nuclear Arsenal

Obama promised to neuter America before the election in one of his campaign ads to supporters:

Quote:

"I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons."

Barack Obama
Presidential Election Ad

That was one promise he decided to keep.

As promised, Barack Obama will go ahead with his plan to weaken America's stand in the world. The Guardian reported today http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...uclear-weapons that Obama is pushing a radical plan to eliminate not hundreds but thousands of the nation's strategic warheads, via Free Republic. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2344348/posts

Quote:

Barack Obama has demanded the Pentagon conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country's arsenal, the Guardian can reveal.

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.

Those options include:

• Reconfiguring the US nuclear force to allow for an arsenal measured in hundreds rather than thousands of deployed strategic warheads.

• Redrafting nuclear doctrine to narrow the range of conditions under which the US would use nuclear weapons.

• Exploring ways of guaranteeing the future reliability of nuclear weapons without testing or producing a new generation of warheads.

The review is due to be completed by the end of this year, and European officials say the outcome is not yet clear. But one official said: "Obama is now driving this process. He is saying these are the president's weapons, and he wants to look again at the doctrine and their role."

The move comes as Obama prepares to take the rare step of chairing a watershed session of the UN security council on Thursday. It is aimed at winning consensus on a new grand bargain: exchanging more radical disarmament by nuclear powers in return for wider global efforts to prevent further proliferation.

Of course, as Obama goes ahead with this radical reduction Iran and Venezuela are moving forward with their nuclear programs. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,550584,00.html

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...s-radical.html

Obama knows more about weapons requirements than the military now? I think it's time to start ringing the alarm bells with this guy, folks. I doubt very much if this will only be any nuclear capability, as in this case.

He'll gut the military worse than Clinton did. That is what led Rumsfeld to say you go to war with the army you've got. He actually believes he can simply talk to everyone. And in the meantime he is going to leave America disarmed.

Quote:

Barack Obama has demanded the Pentagon conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country's arsenal, the Guardian can reveal.

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...s-arsenal.html

Wasn't North Korea testing their capabilities recently as well ??

gmyers · 09-21-2009, 01:03 AM

He can get rid of ours but what about the other countries. I doubt they'll get rid of theirs. I'd hate to think they have them but we don't. I wish we could live in a world where no one has them but we don't. And the countries that are getting them now hate America and everything it stands for.

pepperpot · 09-21-2009, 09:18 AM

Sheeps to the slaughter...........

SHELBYDOG · 09-21-2009, 10:40 AM

I don't believe any of this for a minute!

Also why is it that everything Obama does or says is "radical"? Every time I read something posted as soon as I see this word, I'm done reading any further into the article......

pepperpot · 09-21-2009, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHELBYDOG

I don't believe any of this for a minute!

Also why is it that everything Obama does or says is "radical"? Every time I read something posted as soon as I see this word, I'm done reading any further into the article......

Quote:

Radical.......

3 a : marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional : extreme b : tending or disposed to make extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions c : of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change d : advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs <the radical right>

Maybe because it is? And you are correct, not everything he does is radical....some of it is just plain asinine.

Quote:

Main Entry: as·i·nine
Pronunciation: \ˈa-sə-ˌnīn\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin asininus, from asinus ass
Date: 15th century
1 : extremely or utterly foolish <an asinine excuse>
2 : of, relating to, or resembling an ass

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/asinine

Quote:

Who you gonna believe - Obama or Webster ??

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/radical

Who you gonna believe - Obama or Webster ??

Bahet · 09-21-2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

He'll gut the military worse than Clinton did. That is what led Rumsfeld to say you go to war with the army you've got. He actually believes he can simply talk to everyone. And in the meantime he is going to leave America disarmed.

Point of contention - Rummy didn't say that because of Clinton gutting the military. Clinton didn't get rid of Kevlar and bullets and armored Humvees for the troops. But that's how the soldiers arrived in Iraq. The Bush administration just didn't want to pay for supplies to be shipped over.

jeanea33 · 09-21-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bahet

Point of contention - Rummy didn't say that because of Clinton gutting the military. Clinton didn't get rid of Kevlar and bullets and armored Humvees for the troops. But that's how the soldiers arrived in Iraq. The Bush administration just didn't want to pay for supplies to be shipped over.

If I remember correctly it was the senate who threatened many times not to fund the troops. Has it changed since Obama has been president? How he's slashing our defense budget. I actually blame our senate over the president. Obama he is really new to politics. The senate they are old pro's. The have weighed down every bill they passed with their agenda. Remember either the senate or the president can stop any bill. They can't pass anything without agreeing. So I personally blame both.

SurferGirl · 09-21-2009, 12:38 PM

Well most of us knew of Obama's intentions while he was running for office because he made comments like nuclear weapons would be off the table.
I wonder what he plans on doing when we get attacked and it's no longer if it's when. Look at all the countries that are building arsenals.

Sometimes it gets more and more obvious who's side Obama really is on and surprise it's not ours.

krisharry · 09-21-2009, 12:45 PM

My thoughts on this-Obama will not achieve a nuclear free world, as long as one country out there has nukes, we will continue to have them.

But I see no reason why we can't drastically reduce the number of warheads that we have. Even if our number were in the hundreds, that would still be enough to obliterate the planet a few times over at least. Just a few warheads would be a deterrent. So if we can save some money by scrapping some, I say we do it. Maybe the $$ saved (if any) could be used to provide the military w/things they actually need, kevlar, nightvision, armored vehicles, etc.

Jolie Rouge · 09-21-2009, 02:05 PM

Quote:

I don't believe any of this for a minute!

You don't believe that Obama actually said it ... or you don't believe that it is being acurately reported ?

Quote:

Also why is it that everything Obama does or says is "radical"?

I think it is the company he keeps ...

Quote:

Every time I read something posted as soon as I see this word, I'm done reading any further into the article......

Way to keep an open mind ...

SHELBYDOG · 09-21-2009, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

You don't believe that Obama actually said it ... or you don't believe that it is being acurately reported ?

I think it is the company he keeps ...

Way to keep an open mind ...

Maybe keep an open mind yourself a bit, if you want people to read the other sides views, use sensible language instead of hateful language. It gets very old reading hate & anger articles against someone you support. To spread hate & anger is one thing, if you want people to believe what your posting make it believable & not just hateful info...