What Happened to Preserve, Protect, and Defend?

American Thinker ^ | March 28, 2012 | John Griffing

[jazusamo]

How does a president of the United States whose allegiance is to his country knowingly and in plain sight sabotage his nation's defenses? Until recently, the discussions of severe military cuts remained in the appropriate realm of working groups, and few seriously considered Obama's radical campaign promises to eliminate nuclear weapons from the U.S. arsenal to be of any real validity. After all, many Democrat presidential contenders before Obama had pandered to pacifists and the armies of the naïve swelling the Democratic base in order to get elected. But none of these individuals actually took proactive steps to completely remove America's nuclear triad from the list of strategic options. Our ability to instill fear in the hearts of our enemies, both current and future, was left unquestioned by all previous presidents, minor reductions in stockpiles notwithstanding.

Obama has done what no guardian of America would do: systematically tear down the most vital of America's defenses, all while America's enemies wait with bated breath for the nation that owes trillions in debt to be left standing defenseless. What happens when America lays down its arms? It seems Obama would like to find out. Americans may be the unintended (intended?) victims of a perverse social experiment.

Leaks from high-level defense sources reveal that in addition to commitments under the New START agreement, which brings the total number of deliverable U.S. warheads to 1,000 -- an unacceptably low number that prevents the U.S. from being able to destroy the 3,000 priority strategic targets identified by the DoD -- Obama now plans to implement an 80-percent force reduction that will leave America with only 300 deliverable warheads. Such a move is suicidal. Such a low number is wholly insufficient to protect America...

[jazusamo]

Perhaps the Justices fear the wrath of future generations who, using current and future technologies, will read their nation's history, and know that this Court's decision on this blatant "power grab" disguised in various semantic terms as related to "health care," either preserved their individual liberty, or contributed to the destruction of their freedom.

An excellent point. Would love to see at least a 6-3 ruling on this by SCOTUS but think it's more likely to be a 5-4 to preserve individual liberty. I doubt any of the liberals and leftists on the court can bring themselves to decide for our freedom.

Thank you for your appropriate and most profound posts on these matters, LL2, it's appreciated.

[JDoutrider]

mark

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

New START Treaty cut US deployed nuclear weapons from 5600 to 1600 - a 70% reduction.

RATIFIED by US Senate in 2011.

Fine, we'll verify the actual reduction the same way the Russians do. We'll lie about it as we put on a second shift to double the number on hand.

At least that's what would happen if I were King...

Regards,
GtG

PS Those who hammer their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.