Author Topic: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.  (Read 616 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39829
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« on: September 21, 2009, 08:10:50 AM »
Barack Obama ready to slash US nuclear arsenal
Pentagon told to map out radical cuts as president prepares to chair UN talks
www.guardian.co.uk

Sunday 20 September 2009 21.30 BST

 
President Obama's decision to order a review comes as he takes the rare step of chairing a watershed session of the UN security council. Photograph: Reuters

Barack Obama has demanded the Pentagon conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country's arsenal, the Guardian can reveal.

'A multilateral process in which weapons states agree to radical disarmament':

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.

Those options include:

• Reconfiguring the US nuclear force to allow for an arsenal measured in hundreds rather than thousands of deployed strategic warheads.

• Redrafting nuclear doctrine to narrow the range of conditions under which the US would use nuclear weapons.

• Exploring ways of guaranteeing the future reliability of nuclear weapons without testing or producing a new generation of warheads.

The review is due to be completed by the end of this year, and European officials say the outcome is not yet clear. But one official said: "Obama is now driving this process. He is saying these are the president's weapons, and he wants to look again at the doctrine and their role."

The move comes as Obama prepares to take the rare step of chairing a watershed session of the UN security council on Thursday. It is aimed at winning consensus on a new grand bargain: exchanging more radical disarmament by nuclear powers in return for wider global efforts to prevent further proliferation.

That bargain is at the heart of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which is up for review next year amid signs it is unravelling in the face of Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions.

In an article for the Guardian today, the foreign secretary, David Miliband, argues that failure to win a consensus would be disastrous. "This is one of the most critical issues we face," the foreign secretary writes. "Get it right, and we will increase global security, pave the way for a world without nuclear weapons, and improve access to affordable, safe and dependable energy – vital to tackle climate change. Get it wrong, and we face the spread of nuclear weapons and the chilling prospect of nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists."

According to a final draft of the resolution due to be passed on Thursday, however, the UN security council will not wholeheartedly embrace the US and Britain's call for eventual abolition of nuclear weapons. Largely on French insistence, the council will endorse the vaguer aim of seeking "to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons".

Gordon Brown is due to use this week's UN general assembly meeting to renew a diplomatic offensive on Iran for its failure to comply with security council demands that it suspend enrichment of uranium. The issue has been given greater urgency by an International Atomic Energy Agency document leaked last week which showed inspectors for the agency believed Iran already had "sufficient information" to build a warhead, and had tested an important component of a nuclear device.

Germany is also expected to toughen its position on Iran ahead of a showdown between major powers and the Iranian government on 1 October. But it is not yet clear what position will be taken by Russia, which has hitherto opposed the imposition of further sanctions on Iran.

Moscow's stance will be closely watched for signs of greater co-operation in return for Obama's decision last week to abandon a missile defence scheme in eastern Europe, a longstanding source of irritation to Russia.

"I hope the Russians realise they have to do something serious. I don't think a deal has been done, but there is a great deal of expectation," said a British official.

Russia has approximately 2,780 deployed strategic warheads, compared with around 2,100 in the US. The abandonment of the US missile defence already appears to have spurred arms control talks currently underway between Washington and Moscow: the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, said today that chances were "quite high" that a deal to reduce arsenals to 1,500 warheads each would be signed by the end of the year.

The US nuclear posture review is aimed at clearing the path for a new round of deep US-Russian cuts to follow almost immediately after that treaty is ratified, to set lower limits not just on deployed missiles but also on the thousands of warheads both have in their stockpiles.

The Obama strategy is to create disarmament momentum in the run-up to the non-proliferation treaty review conference next May, in the hope that states without nuclear weapons will not side with Iran, as they did at the last review in 2005, but endorse stronger legal barriers to nuclear proliferation, and forego nuclear weapons programmes themselves.

"The review has up to now been in the hands of mid-level bureaucrats with a lot of knowledge, but it's knowledge drawn from the cold war. What they are prepared to do is tweak the existing doctrine," said Rebecca Johnson, the head of the Acronym Institute, a pro-disarmament pressure group. "Obama has sent them it back saying: 'Give me more options for what we can do in line with my goals. I'm not saying it's easy, but all you're giving me is business as usual.'"

________________________ ________________________ _____

Another day, another reminder why Jimmy Carter is loving life right now.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #1 on: September 21, 2009, 08:21:11 AM »
if our enemies do the same, why not?

if we have enough nukes to destroy the world 10 times, isn't that enough?

or are we immature enough to say "Russia can destory the world 80 times, and we can only destory it 70 times... let's borrow $300 bil for more weapons..."

i get it.  Borrowing $ is bad for fixing American banks and automakers to save american jobs.  but blowing money unnescessarily on weapons - we back that!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39829
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #2 on: September 21, 2009, 08:23:20 AM »
if our enemies do the same, why not?

if we have enough nukes to destroy the world 10 times, isn't that enough?

or are we immature enough to say "Russia can destory the world 80 times, and we can only destory it 70 times... let's borrow $300 bil for more weapons..."

i get it.  Borrowing $ is bad for fixing American banks and automakers to save american jobs.  but blowing money unnescessarily on weapons - we back that!!

Because they are not going to do it jackass. 

NK & Iran are racing to build nuclear weapons.  Russia is only going to destroy the crap they know is useless and doesnt work all while keeping the most potent stuff. 

This is Barry getting rolled again, and again, and again.   

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2009, 08:32:43 AM »
if our enemies do the same, why not?

if we have enough nukes to destroy the world 10 times, isn't that enough?

or are we immature enough to say "Russia can destory the world 80 times, and we can only destory it 70 times... let's borrow $300 bil for more weapons..."

i get it.  Borrowing $ is bad for fixing American banks and automakers to save american jobs.  but blowing money unnescessarily on weapons - we back that!!

Perhaps Obama can get Russia to bring down their arsenal of weapons to a controllable size.

Because the problem is not so much that the Russians would use the nuclear weapons.

But rather that one or two missiles would be lost and end up in terrorist hands.

And that would be a disaster.

Ideally, Russia would get their nuclear arsenal down to US size.

Hopefully this initiative by Obama will make that happen.
As empty as paradise

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2009, 08:38:25 AM »
Because they are not going to do it jackass. 

well, you want to have a dick measuring contest with russia on nukes that'll neve be used?  Okay, you do that.

I'm happy with enough nukes to blow the place up 10 times.  That's just me.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39829
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #5 on: September 21, 2009, 08:40:20 AM »
well, you want to have a dick measuring contest with russia on nukes that'll neve be used?  Okay, you do that.

I'm happy with enough nukes to blow the place up 10 times.  That's just me.

240 - did you not read the article?

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2009, 09:50:16 AM »
240 - did you not read the article?

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.


haha such propaganda he has never once stated his desire to not have nuclear weapons.  Pure speculation.
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39829
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #7 on: September 21, 2009, 09:55:08 AM »
haha such propaganda he has never once stated his desire to not have nuclear weapons.  Pure speculation.

Face it, He is worse than Carter and will be nothing more than a one term mistake.   

Hereford

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4028
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #8 on: September 21, 2009, 10:01:19 AM »
Lets take out all our old nuclear arsenal, sell it to Russias direct enemys, and use the proceeds to built a super-sweet missile defense system.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #9 on: September 21, 2009, 11:45:56 AM »
haha such propaganda he has never once stated his desire to not have nuclear weapons.  Pure speculation.

Yeah...another jackass who doesn't understand Barry or where he comes from. THis is the goal of the left, it has always been the goal...thats why they opposed star wars...thats why they are weak. Russia wants cuts because they can't maintain their own stocks of nukes..they want the money for their next generation of weapons. They know they can roll Barry and that he's weak and that they have a narrow window to get as much from him as possible before we come to our senses and banish the douchbag leftists forever.
L

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #10 on: September 21, 2009, 02:51:15 PM »
Yeah...another jackass who doesn't understand Barry or where he comes from. THis is the goal of the left, it has always been the goal...thats why they opposed star wars...thats why they are weak. Russia wants cuts because they can't maintain their own stocks of nukes..they want the money for their next generation of weapons. They know they can roll Barry and that he's weak and that they have a narrow window to get as much from him as possible before we come to our senses and banish the douchbag leftists forever.

Oh yes and you know all this how? Because you are some grunt in the army? You're self serving yourself with this scare mongering 'russia will take us over' BS.  Way to keep trying to drum up funds for more unnecessary military spending. 

Abandon every hope...

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2009, 03:06:09 PM »
Ah dude..I'm not a "grunt" in the army. Did anything I posted say the Russians are going to take us over..ur a jackass. Let me explain in simple words...the less the Russians spend on their massive but crumbling nuclear infrastructure, the more they can pump into their military. Why is this,  several reasons...one being the results of the recent invasion in Georgia where results were mixed despite invading with more then the 50K troops. US trained units shitcanned several of theirs, despite being tiny and equiped with the same Russian junk that the current Russian Army uses. They fired alot of their top guys. Russia wants to be a player and loves poking us in the eye. Now if u can post any experience either working with folks who deal with the Russians...worked with their forces yourself...get briefs dealing with Russian capabilities or can do anything more on any topic here then blither on mindless crap...u go ahead and try. Ur out of ur depth..u don't even try and post ideas from dissenting opinions on the Russians. Go get a job and stop wasting my tax dollars.
L

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39829
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2009, 03:11:07 PM »
Ah dude..I'm not a "grunt" in the army. Did anything I posted say the Russians are going to take us over..ur a jackass. Let me explain in simple words...the less the Russians spend on their massive but crumbling nuclear infrastructure, the more they can pump into their military. Why is this,  several reasons...one being the results of the recent invasion in Georgia where results were mixed despite invading with more then the 50K troops. US trained units shitcanned several of theirs, despite being tiny and equiped with the same Russian junk that the current Russian Army uses. They fired alot of their top guys. Russia wants to be a player and loves poking us in the eye. Now if u can post any experience either working with folks who deal with the Russians...worked with their forces yourself...get briefs dealing with Russian capabilities or can do anything more on any topic here then blither on mindless crap...u go ahead and try. Ur out of ur depth..u don't even try and post ideas from dissenting opinions on the Russians. Go get a job and stop wasting my tax dollars.

HH6 - Hope & change baby - thats all that matters. 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Obama to propose "radical cuts" to USA's nuclear arms supply.
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2009, 03:16:57 PM »
Unreal....these people don't get it. I love the fall back..ur a dumb grunt...or they're not trying to take us over...yeah thats exactly what I posted right. ::).  The damm Russians want to be us...they want everybody either kissing their asses, or tremble in their boots. Thats not happening. Until it does, Russia will play its games.
L