Posted on 04/05/2010 5:37:13 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
A. weakened America...or some combination of the above.
B. strengthened islam
C. attacked Israel
Can you cite something -anything- of substance that he’s done that doesn’t fit A, B and/or C?
THAT is why we have a very long road ahead indeed, if there is a road back to a strong and prosperous United States. The quality of our people has been so debased and corrupted, that the majority of voters could not identify him as a communist, neither can they identify communism as a threat.
They care little for freedom or liberty, and that is one of our greatest weaknesses.
“At some point, you have to ask yourself, is it because he is a stupid leftist or is it something even worse?”
At first I thought he was just stupid. But as more time passes I realize he knows exactly what he`s doing. He won`t settle for anything less than the total destruction of this country.
“They care little for freedom or liberty, and that is one of our greatest weaknesses.”
All they care about is getting a freebie. Nothing else matters to them.
Congress would have a say policy wise, maybe. Execution is up to the Commander-in-Chief. The way I see it, America as we know it is in great danger.
If obama’s election is voided( a law requires,not impeached) It would void all electorial college votes for obama. this would leave McCain with the majority of the votes and the legal president of the U.S. If obama’s election is voided,it’s voids everything he during and after his election is voided ,this includes the selection of biden as vice-president. obama did not have the right to select a vice- president if he never had the right to be president.
obama selected biden as vice-president during his campaign , if congress voids his campaign ( it never happened) then biden was never legally chosen as vice-presiden as obama never had the right to choose a vice-president. biden would go away as well as anything obama did while pretenting to be “president”. You are right it would void all bills,treaties,hires, and appointments.
So you are saying that NOTHING can be done until January of next year. We should just lay back and enjoy the ride until then?
Hearings, even minority hearings on issues such as this new nuclear arms policy, would help get GOP canndiates elected.
You think just saying "vote for us" is going to do the job?
Nope also what is the purpose of the boomer submarine fleet now? If you refuse to launch a nuke you don’t need strategic defense.
So you are saying that NOTHING can be done until January of next year. We should just lay back and enjoy the ride until then?
Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm saying.
You know... I didn't vote for Obama, but the GOP ticket. I didn't need anyone to tell me or show me that he was way, way wrong for us in this country. But, more than 10 million more voters voted for Obama than voted for the GOP ticket.
There's the real problem there. And that's why we've got the problem now.
I'm not saying that the GOP can't "kick up the dust" (you know... like a bull pawing the ground...) but it's not going to get anywhere, in terms of getting Obama out of office, before the next election comes around.
I still think that the big issue is going to be "jobs" and that's where the GOP should be concentrating. That's where Obama will "go down" with the public in general, if this keeps getting worse and worse (which it appears that it will).
It's back to that saying, once again ...
It's the economy, stupid!
Hearings, even minority hearings on issues such as this new nuclear arms policy, would help get GOP canndiates elected.
You think just saying "vote for us" is going to do the job?
No, but I will tell you what "is" going to do the job. It's getting more GOP voters... :-)
Now, notice, I'm not talking about getting more "anti-Obama" voters (which you probably will pick up, in the meantime, with the "jobs situation"). Those "anti-Obama" voters aren't going to change the picture in the long run. All they'll do is go back to another kind of liberal leftist candidate -- just not "Obama" ... you see.
The true solution is to grow more GOP voters. And I do say "GOP voters" ... as no one is going to win elections with third-party offshoots. All third-paty offshoots are going to do is hand things over to the Democrats, as if you could do that any more than has already been done now.
So, we need to grow more "GOP voters" -- there's your solution...
But, I can't say that I know the "formula" for growing those GOP voters, because it hasn't been working for a long time now.
Nope also what is the purpose of the boomer submarine fleet now? If you refuse to launch a nuke you don’t need strategic defense.
Well, I coulda sworn that many articles were talking about nuclear bunker busters. Maybe those articles were just "talking through their hat" ... LOL ...
BUT, in regards to those submarines, we've got enough there to obliterate the rest of the world. There's no shortage of nuclear weaponry there.
And the MAD Doctrine is still in place, no matter what, because of those submarines. If any country attempts to bomb the U.S. with nuclear weapons, they know that even if it's "after the fact" of an attack happening here on U.S. soil -- that country will "no longer exists" after that happens here. You can thank the submarines for that one.
So, that deterrence is still there (with other nations doing that to us).
It's just that this kind of deterrence, is of no use to lunatic and fringe groups, like these Islamic terrorists, who also can acquire the capability of bombing us with nuclear weapons in our major cities.
No matter what you do with your "nuclear policy", those groups are still going to operate just as they did before.
And, furthermore, I believe the Bush Administration when it said it was not a matter of "if" -- but only a matter of "when" such an attack happened to the United States. They were saying that it's a certainty and that they were preparing for it to happen.
That's where I would concentrate our efforts -- is on these crazy and lunatic fringe groups who can carry off an attack like this -- and not be that concerned about our nuclear policy with some country sending missiles over here to nuke us -- because that country won't be existing the "day after" and other countries "know that" ... LOL ...
If obama’s election is voided( a law requires,not impeached) It would void all electorial college votes for obama. this would leave McCain with the majority of the votes and the legal president of the U.S. If obama’s election is voided,it’s voids everything he during and after his election is voided ,this includes the selection of biden as vice-president. obama did not have the right to select a vice- president if he never had the right to be president.
You're living in an "Alice in Wonderland" if you think that's ever going to happen. ... LOL ...
There's a lot of stuff that goes on in politics and with legal matters in this country in which one could say that there's a "chance" that something may happen (i.e., "succeed") with one side, even if it is a "Hail Mary" gambit.
BUT, "this" is one where one could say, "not in a million years..." :-)
If one wants to work on getting rid of Obama, one better work very diligently on this next election where he's running -- because that is where we can get him out of office.
http://bit.ly/9iwCOQ
Joe Biden spoke to congress in 1992.On the Threshold of the New World Order. An American Agenda for the New World Order. Fulfilling the Wilsonian Vision
To really understand the purpose of Biden's foreign policy white paper, you should probably know what the Wilsonian Vision is. Wilsonianism is based upon former President Woodrow Wilson's "14 Points" speech to Congress in the early 1900s. Parts of this vision include the removal of borders and completely free and unrestricted trade among nations. It calls for the removal of all armaments except the bare necessities needed for domestic safety. Sound familiar? Think Obama's call for the destruction of ALL American nuclear weapons and a refusal to build more, regardless of what our adversaries may have. Finally, it calls for the restructuring of Europe along ethnic and nationalist lines.
For those who don't understand the concept of the "New World Order", allow me to 'splain! By today's standards, the New World Order can be easily translated to mean a real "United Nations" in which there is a world court, a world police force, a world government, etc. American would become subservient to this new government and be forced to obey it's laws. We would, like all nations signing onto the agreement, cease to become an autonomous nation and a part of the "one planet, one government" mentality. The United Nations constitution would replace our constitution.
I find it interesting that back in 1992 when this paper was published, Mr. Biden complained that our standard of living in the United States had stagnated. We could not go any further in our society. Unfortunately, the "change" this country so needs would not come along for another 16 years in the form of one Barack Obama. Isn't it amazing then how much true progress this country has actually seen through those years? The economy improved by leaps and bounds. The United States wrestled the title of the nation with the most millionaires.
The end game I believe is Obama head of the United Nations. King of the world.George Soros in charge of the world bank. Obama along with Pelosi will place as much power as possible within the United nations while Obama is in office.
My money's on Michele Bachmann, if we can get this g*d-d***ed Congress turned around in November.
Ronald Reagan must be turning in his grave and this is enough to send Margaret Thatcher to hers.
All the 'Rats in the House and Senate.
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.