Who cares what he does. A real American President will disregard this nonsense and do what is necessary.
Destroy every nuclear device we have?
Disarm the U.S. and fully arm Iran. The Rosenbergs deserve an apology.
Rid the world of them. Isn't that sweet.
After years of study, here is my politically incorrect version of what I believe actually took place with the START treaties and subsequent Obama agreements, and why they are so dangerous to our future existence.
To repeat, this is not the official version of what we “know.”
While there has been a significant reduction of Russian warheads from their peak of nearly 55,000 at the “height” of the “Cold War”, Moscow had already reduced or streamlined this number by roughly a third before START I.
However, this “streamlining” is related to the creation of much more powerful warheads.
Both the START I and START II agreements were very much “for public consumption” treaties.
START I and START II represented successful diversions or “fake outs” of the vast majority of people in the US and NATO sphere. At the end of the day, 99% + of society has been duped by both Russian and American propaganda machines.
Well in advance of START I and after START II was signed, the Russian Strategic Rocket Force, moved several thousand warheads out from RVSN RF (also referred to as the Strategic Nuclear Forces or SNF) over to their Russian Ministry of Energy. By doing so, these warheads were simply not eliminated, while creating the appearance of compliance. The warheads which were moved laterally to the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Energy were simply not included in negotiation. In addition, it is believed by some that a number of warheads which were to be eliminated by treaty were also moved over to the Russian Ministry of Energy.
While this is not the full story, the timing of this lateral transfer of nuclear warheads coincided with Russia’s temporary 14 June 2002, withdrawal from the START II Treaty. Russian Parliament (which consisted of many former Politburo members) would not comply until they knew they had safely retained the majority of their stockpile.
” ...ratified by the U.S. Senate on 26 January 1996 with a vote of 87-4. Russia ratified START II on 14 April 2000, but on 14 June 2002, withdrew from the treaty...” https://www.nti.org
Soon after, there was a subsequent organizational realignment of the Russian Ministry of Energy with their SNF.
The Clinton administration simply looked the other way, and every subsequent fictional agreement involving Obama is a complete joke on us, foisted on America by compliant and willful left-wing media.
Even worse, our foreign policy has now largely resulted in a real nuclear arms race across much Asia.
Additionally, unless we very quietly retained a much larger stockpile as the Russians have, the Chinese arsenal will equal or surpass our arsenal in the near future.
If I am right, the old policy or deterrence “strategy” of Mutual Assured Destruction, may truly not exist in the very near future.
Again, in a nutshell, this is a summary of my entirely politically incorrect narrative.
He plans to dismantle all our nukes, then paint a big sign somewhere that says, “Bomb us.”
He’s going to do as much damage as he can to the country he hates in his final six months - it won’t be pretty....
Trump will roll that one back during the first week.
Breaking the War Mentality (Obama's 1983 College Magazine Article )
On the other hand, I'm not sure Obama has control of the football now anyway--he might think he does. . .
Wont be policy very long.
How stupid is that? If all ccw folks had a no first use, meaning you had to be shot at and possibly hit,first.
Jeeez, what a moron.
Since when have we ever had a policy that allows us to launch or “shoot first”? All I’ve ever heard about is M.A.D. If they fire, we fire. And “they” knew we would shoot back. Now they know there’s a good possibility we’ll never shoot back.
0bama gave NATO our missile shield last week. Just handed it over.
I don’t buy it. Obama just wants more plausible deniability,
and ~100% of voters would rally around the CIC (and Hillary) in October after the nuclear incident occurs.
HE will broadcast world-wide that the OTHER SIDE STARTED IT. And how would anyone in this country know otherwise?
Nuclear is probably the only type of emergency that might keep him in office past January 20th, but even if THAT option doesn’t work,
people would accept whomever he (oops, I mean Valerie Jarrett) picks to replace him.
Probably General Wesley Clark, who used tank-flamethrowers to burn down Waco along with the women and children inside.
” 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.”
Um, when Bro-bama first took office it came out that he’d even taken a “nuclear response” (to a nuclear attack) off the table. His goal is zero nuclear arsenal for the USA.