Obama To Propose Radical Cuts In America's Arsenal

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.

This guy looks more dangerous and irresponsible every day.

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.

Comments

[WPE]

"We are not just discussing limits on a further increase of nuclear weapons. We seek, instead, to reduce their number. We seek the total elimination one day of nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth."

Ronald Reagan - Second Inaugural Address - http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres62.html

[Lala]

It's not what they say, it's what they do.

[Fishner]

I prefer the quote in context, WPE:

"We have made progress in restoring our defense capability. But much remains to be done. There must be no wavering by us, nor any doubts by others, that America will meet her responsibilities to remain free, secure, and at peace.
There is only one way safely and legitimately to reduce the cost of national security, and that is to reduce the need for it. And this we are trying to do in negotiations with the Soviet Union. We are not just discussing limits on a further increase of nuclear weapons. We seek, instead, to reduce their number. We seek the total elimination one day of nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth.
Now, for decades, we and the Soviets have lived under the threat of mutual assured destruction; if either resorted to the use of nuclear weapons, the other could retaliate and destroy the one who had started it. Is there either logic or morality in believing that if one side threatens to kill tens of millions of our people, our only recourse is to threaten killing tens of millions of theirs?
I have approved a research program to find, if we can, a security shield that would destroy nuclear missiles before they reach their target. It wouldn't kill people, it would destroy weapons. It wouldn't militarize space, it would help demilitarize the arsenals of Earth. It would render nuclear weapons obsolete. We will meet with the Soviets, hoping that we can agree on a way to rid the world of the threat of nuclear destruction."

With the context included, it's much easier to contrast Obama's amateurish unilateral disarmament giveaway plan with Reagan's understanding that it is better to negotiate with your enemies from a position of strength than pusillanimity.

Obama's going to get rolled like Kennedy.

[Rich K]

Pacifists are useful to provide balance to these issues but fatal when relied upon to make decisions affecting the security of nations and their peoples.Obama is a pacifist extrordinaire.See Wilson, Chamberlin,McClellan,Carter.

[Dennis D]

Like Carter and other Liberals Obama believes hostile nations are only reacting to American Evils. When will this nightmare end?

[syn]

"When will this nightmare end?"

When insta-Americans pull their collective head out of Jon Stewart and Bill Maher's collective anal cavity.

[CTG]

Ol' Big Ears is just following his philosophy - wide eyed, wimpiness, period.

The good news is, the American public has finally awakened and is stopping the plans of our Marxist-Moooslim in Chief.

[bruceT]

Obama has contempt for our country and the American people. His goal is to weaken our country so as to ingratiate ourselves to our adversaries.

He is anti-American at his core, for proof, see all his friends he associated with all his life. Anti-Americans, communists, anarchists, etc.

[xerocky]

This will make a nice clear point for the Republicans to argue against in the next election cycle, esp if Russia or Iran get too bold any time soon.

What about "President Ahmadinejad repeated his claim that the Holocaust was a lie" does Obama not understand?

Over and over again he's reaching out to a holocaust denier. Listen to this quote from Obama back in June:

""Without going into specifics, what I do believe is that Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations. On the other hand, the international community has a very real interest in preventing a nuclear arms race in the region," Obama said.

("without going into specifics", Barry, when do you ever go into specifics on ANYTHING?)

So, Ahmadinejad, the known holocaust denier, has legit nuclear aspirations, and for some reason that’s perfectly ok? So long as “the international community” can do inspections. When some country or another has already gotten into a business deal selling nuclear technology to Iran, do you truly believe that they’re going to shut the deal down mid way through, because the inspectors weren’t allowed into such and such a room?

And for what reason do you trust them Barry? Why are we backing down, while you're planting the seeds for them to build up? Who's side are you on? Is it too much to ask that Iran shut up with the holocaust denial before they’re allowed to even think about being sold nuclear power? Someone should remind Obama that diplomacy isn’t just laying on your back and giving everything away, he’s supposed to represent the United States. Iran isn’t even pretending to be cool about it.

He's not going to destroy our old weapons, he's going to use some back room deal to sell them to Iran. And then he's going to give the money to ACORN thugs so they can block the polls and make sure that he gets voted in again. Sure it's paranoid, but if that exact plot happened, would you be shocked given the naivety and/or the blatant anti Americanism of this guy?

[WPE]

"Mrs. Reagan says that her husband’s foremost disappointment was likely the fact that he wasn’t able to achieve his goal of doing away with nuclear weapons."

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/06/nancy-reagan-speaks-out-about-obamas-the-bushes-and-her-husband.html

Militry expenditures:

United States 636,292,979,000
Russian Federation 39,600,000,000

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/obama-to-propose-radical-cuts-in-americas-arsenal.html#comments

[gary gulrud]

bruceT has nailed it, he means our children harm.

[WPE]

"Obama has contempt for our country and the American people. His goal is to weaken our country so as to ingratiate ourselves to our adversaries.

He is anti-American at his core, for proof, see all his friends he associated with all his life. Anti-Americans, communists, anarchists, etc."

You're an idiot.