Obama to Urge Elimination of World’s Nuclear Weapons

The New York Times ^ | October 2, 2007 | Jeff Zeleny

[2ndDivisionVet]

Senator Barack Obama will propose on Tuesday setting a goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons in the world, saying the United States should greatly reduce its stockpiles to lower the threat of nuclear terrorism, aides say.

In a speech at DePaul University in Chicago, Mr. Obama will add his voice to a plan endorsed earlier this year by a bipartisan group of former government officials from the cold war era who say the United States must begin building a global consensus to reverse a reliance on nuclear weapons that have become “increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective.”

Mr. Obama, according to details provided by his campaign Monday, also will call for pursuing vigorous diplomatic efforts aimed at a global ban on the development, production and deployment of intermediate-range missiles.

“In 2009, we will have a window of opportunity to renew our global leadership and bring our nation together,” Mr. Obama is planning to say, according to an excerpt of remarks provided by his aides. “If we don’t seize that moment, we may not get another.”

His speech was to come one day after an announcement by the Bush administration that it had tripled the rate of dismantling nuclear weapons over the last year, putting the United States on track to reducing its stockpile of weapons by half by 2012.

The exact number of weapons being dismantled, like the overall stockpile, is secret, but officials said Monday that with the planned reductions, the total number of American nuclear weapons would be at the lowest levels since Dwight D. Eisenhower was president.

Under a 2002 treaty, the United States and Russia agreed to limit the number of operational nuclear weapons in their arsenals to between 1,700 and 2,200 by 2012, though that agreement did not address weapons in reserve stockpiles.

[Bogtrotter52]

When is the candlelight vigil? When does the symbolic fasting begin? LOL

[Sender]

I doubt if B. Hussein O. is strategically working for the caliphate, he is just naive and idealistic. He thinks like a lot of college students.

Would we want some pacifist college student as commander in chief? I think not.

[pigsmith]

Great. Now I have that tune stuck in my head!

As revenge, I’ll ask, do you remember, “A-a-afternoon Delight!”

...ha, take that....

[alrea]

BO is also on record as opposing cancer, crime, hunger, and collisions with asteroids...

some in the media think his strengthes pertaining to asteroids could really come into play

[farlander]

Yep, I want anti-matter warheads. Forget the dirty nukes - they pollute too much. Antimatter warhead wouldn’t have any side effects left (other that the intended). Then you just move in and drill for whatever resources you need... glass, etc.

[BlackjackPershing]

B. Hussein Obama...total dip$hit.

[newzjunkey]

Amy Carter will be his Secretary of Defense. (/s)

[BulletBobCo]

Oh yeah...tough guy

Take this.....

It’s a world of laughter
A world of tears
It’s a world of hopes
And a world of fears
There’s so much that we share
That it’s time we’re aware
It’s a small world after all

There is just one moon
And one golden sun
And a smile means
Friendship to ev’ryone
Though the mountains divide
And the oceans are wide
It’s a small world after all

It’s a small world after all
It’s a small world after all
It’s a small world after all
It’s a small, small world

How do you like me now!

[wastedyears]

This guy’s a bleedin’ idiot. Nukes are the best form of deterrence a country could have. If you want any nukes gone, eliminate the suitcase nukes. Keep them deployed by rocket or plane. Much easier to keep track of.

I use British slang in place of cuss words.

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

Obama figures we got to surrender to our enemies sooner or later, why not sooner.

[Merlinator]

Is Osama-Obama auditioning for SNL???

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

...the United States should greatly reduce its stockpiles to lower the threat of nuclear terrorism...

As usual, he's got it exactly backwards... If we have fewer weapons, then that makes them all the more valuable. It makes striking at them with a dirty bomb an option - rendering them unusable. It also changes the equation on if/when to use them. As in, just how badly would we want to retaliate for some terrorist strike with WMD to use one or more of our (now more) precious nukes?

Us having more than enough nuclear weapons to deter the major powers (Russia, China, etc.) as well as have plenty left over to slap down any state sponsored terror makes us more safer, not more at risk. Lessening our ability to strike back in kind (with WMD) makes us more vulnerable to terror attacks. This is fairly simple stuff, if Obama is getting this wrong, he's got no hope of handling more complicated analysis...

[Mr. Mojo]

...saying the United States should greatly reduce its stockpiles to lower the threat of nuclear terrorism, aides say.

Memo to Obama: If terrorists planned on nuking a U.S. city they wouldn't use one of our nukes.

[AWG]

A little off topic here but I believe Clinton’s saving grace was when he played the saxophone on the Arsenio Hall show. All the college stoners who are now paying for his policies voted for him. Oh and his China polices worked out well. Nothing like thanking a guy for most favored nation status by feeding his kids lead and toxic waste. But they PROMISED...

[Eric Blair 2084]

Liberalism is the default ideology of the stupid. Just tell the sheeple whatever they want to hear whether you mean it or can actually deliver it or not...and gain power.

Vote for Eric Blair and I promise to end liberalism, socialism, long waits at the supermarket checkout counter and as an added bonus I will guarantee that your favorite sports team will never lose another game as long as I am President!

If there are any other requests, please let me know.

[do the dhue]

Why is it when I call for something, the Demorats always do the opposite. I am calling for the use of nukes and NObama wants to git rid of them? Why does this happen every time?

I have been saying that if Amadjihad wants nukes, lets air deliver some to him.

Did anybody see Zell Miller in 2004? I think it was on the Chris Mathews show, but it might have been during the Republican Convention when Zell asked, 'what are we going to defend ourselves with? Spitballs?'. That tickled me then but it aint funny now.

[dighton]

Giving them up would be madness for us, and unspeakable madness for the Israelis.

[vaudine]

I, too, favor having no nuclear weapons in the world--also favor no war, no hunger, no child abuse, no gangs, no murders, no sickness, etc. However, since I do not expect to become God in this lifetime, my reality checks have told me I am pretty much powerless in the face of rogue nations like No. Korea and Iran; cannot keep places like Sudan from abusing and starving its citizens, cannot change the hearts and minds of haters who commit murder and abuse,aannnndd...you get the picture.

Furthermore, I want a strong President who appreciates our national sovereignty and negotiates calmly from a strong stance while carrying a big stick.

Mr. Obama, you just ain't it!

vaudine

[KTM rider]

I sure hope this doofus gets the nomination ...sheesh

[x_plus_one]

He has a very narrow base, apparently.