Posted on 07/11/2016 1:41:36 PM PDT by plain talk
.... Several U.S. officials briefed on the options told me they include declaring a “no first use” policy for the United States’ nuclear arsenal, which would be a landmark change in the country’s nuclear posture.
Another option under consideration is seeking a U.N. Security Council resolution affirming a ban on the testing of nuclear weapons. This would be a way to enshrine the United States’ pledge not to test without having to seek unlikely Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
The administration is also considering offering Russia a five-year extension of the New START treaty’s limits on deployed nuclear weapons, even though those limits don’t expire until 2021. This way, Obama could ensure that the next administration doesn’t let the treaty lapse.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well, then, don’t worry about the election. Because the Russians or the ChiComs or the Iranians are going to be nuking us shortly after he changes the policy.
I only have six months left, I wonder how much more damage I can do . . . .
I wish he said I only have six months left, how many vacations can I take?
Our enemies abroad must be smiling.
Since we have policies in place which have successfully protected us for the last 60 years. By all means, let’s change them!
Uhh, sure ,, why not? drink
half the populace and all the enemedia has a deathwish anyway.. Lets git r done!!
Some rich guy needs to buy him endless rounds of golf.
russia is on the march, ISIS isn’t contained, north korea is testing nukes and ICBMs, and this guy is talking about unilateral disarmament.
I’ll bet hillary is pissed right now. not that she doesn’t completely agree with him, but she would prefer to keep her agenda a secret until after the election.
Why?? why do this???
I don’t want to see a nuclear exchange, of course. But, who knows what the world situation will be in the future. It’s dangerous enough as is.
But, I would like the nuclear option on the table. I would like ISIS to worry that we might nuke them.
Why any need to tip our hand on this sort of thing???
because (a) his encyclopedia entry is still only three sentences long, (b) he promised to be a “transformative president”, and (c) at this rate, he’ll never get his head on mt. rushmore.
Sounds like his disastrous rules of engagement for our troops that don’t allow our warriors to shoot first and has resulted in many soldiers being killed. Hillary will cement Obama’s edicts into law, leaving our nation vulnerable to attack. Obama should jailed for threatening the security of our country.
“You have nothing to fear with Barack Obama in the White House.” - John McCain 2008
Wow, even the commentors in the WaPo article aren’t pleased with this...
I have been waiting for this one. He has flexibility now. We won’t have nuke capability by the time he leaves office. I doubt he is letting them spend money on keeping the ones we have updated or whatever needs to be done to them to be able to use them.
What will he do with all the nukes he disables? Where do they go? Isis? Iran? NK? anyone know?
Well, stocks are up.
who knows what the world situation will be in the future
*************
Obama. He thinks he knows everything. He doesn’t want to listen to the people’s representatives in the senate or anyone else. He is dangerous and arrogant megalomaniac.
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.