Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 118

Thread: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

  1. #21
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    I think the point of this announcement was simply to negate the Bush beligeranced of "we'll use 'em when we damn well feel like it". There's no reason to incite that kind of fear in other nations, and it probably served to help the enlistment of terrorists.

  2. #22
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    1) People fear the unknown. Ambiguity could also cause fear. Yoda will tell you the rest.
    That uncertainty/degree of unknown associated with ambiguity is what creates its deterrent value.

    2) The policy change clearly leaves a nuclear response on the table should a bio/chem attack become a mass casualty event.
    It leaves an option for "reconsidering" the use of such weapons, so there is a little flexibility. That posture does not have the same deterrent value that would exist if would-be aggressors with such weapons expected a strong possibility of nuclear retaliation should they use chemical/biological weapons.

    3) There is no state that stands a chance against our conventional forces. In the future, possibly, but the policy can always be changed
    The U.S. is the strongest power. However, its strength is not unlimited. One also has to consider potential combinations of powers. At the same time, the threat of non-state entities does not even begin to rival that which existed during the Cold War e.g., they do not pose an existential threat. Flexibility remains paramount.

    4) It's just a policy. As another poster put it, the president always has the red button.
    My view is that it is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to publicly articulating the nation's nuclear posture. I would prefer to preserve a greater level of ambiguity precisely because of the deterrence value such ambiguity has.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    While I don't mind rolling back the number of nuclear weapons we have, since I believe we have way more than needed to achieve deterrence. I'm not liking this roll back of nuclear posture.

    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 nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack.

    Those threats, Mr. Obama argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options,” a combination of old and new 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,” he said in the interview in the Oval Office.


    I agree those threats could be deterred with the "series of graded options" but there's no reason to take the nuclear option off the table as an end all be all deterrence.

    Mr. Obama’s new strategy is bound to be controversial, both among conservatives who have warned against diluting the United States’ most potent deterrent and among liberals who were hoping for a blanket statement that the country would never be the first to use nuclear weapons.

    And here I tend to side more with what the NY times calls the Liberal argument, I think a statement that the US would never be the first to use a WMD, rather than nuclear weapons specifically, shows our commitment to non-proliferation of WMDs while leaving the nuclear option open for an attack which might not be nuclear but just as destructive.
    Last edited by Wiseone; 04-06-10 at 11:50 AM.

  4. #24
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    Excerpted from “The Doomsday Dilemma; This Spring, Barack Obama will push toward his goal of a nuclear-free world. But the stiffest resistance may be at home.” By John Barry and Evan Thomas, NEWSWEEK, Published Apr 3, 2010; From the magazine issue dated Apr 12, 2010
    Obama's dream of a nuke-free world will encounter the stiffest resistance at home—from the people who make and safeguard nuclear weapons. America's nuclear systems are aging, raising questions about the reliability of bombs, planes, and missiles. The U.S. Senate never ratified the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and though the White House has talked hopefully of getting a vote on the CTBT sometime in a first Obama term, congressional staff experts are skeptical. "The CTBT is going nowhere," says a staffer who declined to be named. "The Republicans are not going to go for it." The GOP rationale: the United States needs to at least preserve the option of testing the reliability of old weapons or developing new ones.
    Go figure, the Party of ‘No’ will say “No.”
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  5. #25
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    NATO defense plans included first use of nuclear weapons against invading Soviet forces. America has always refused to commit to no first use until today. Barack Obama is once again changing the course of history and we are better for it.
    How are we BETTER for it? What the hell do you think that Nukes are for? Show???

    No, they keep the freakin peace people. Why do you think that there was a COLD war and not WWIII?

    This is like putting a sign in front of your house saying "Hey, I've got a 12 gauge and ammo. But fear not thieves, I won't shoot you, even if you are ass raping my wife and kids."

    I'm not FOR using nukes, per say, but telling the world we WON'T use them... ARE YOU FREAKING INSANE OBAMA? This doesn't make us SAFER, it tells the rest of the world the man in the White House hasn't got any BALLS.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  6. #26
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    obama the moderate---LOL!

    with the drop of an ill considered word he reverses decades of standing foreign policy, replacing years of thought and research with a typically obamite whim

    was ms hillary consulted about this radical change, was foggy bottom?

    mr blair?

    somehow i think you know the answers

    ms napolitano and mr brennan were never asked about mutallab

    this president just makes this crap up as he goes along

    and, once again, he gives all away gratis, gets nothing in return

    what he WANTS to accomplish with his post-reality mumbo jumbo is to set some kinda poetic example for practitioners of realpolitik like ahmedinejad and kim to emulate

    LOL!

    obama is a radical extremist

    he STILL believes he can change iran's obstinacy over a cup of coffee

    he WANTS to lawyer up ksm with an oj-like dream team (heck, the best terrorist defenders in the world are already on ag holder's doj payroll) and move him to some people's court in lower manhattan presided over by some lance ito lookalike

    he's managed to piss off the entire nation of israel as bad as if calypso louis were in the white house

    he wants to raise serious taxes on ENERGY---both production and consumption---in the middle of our DEPRESSION

    obama is a radical extremist

    his health care is a 2700 page monstrosity of govt takeover---it's so UNPOPULAR the president knows it, hence his wheezing whistle stops in IOWA, in MAINE, in NORTH CAROLINA (where he's still trying to correct all those fishy thoughts in poor ms doris' misinformed mind...)

    where's the result of the reachout, mr president?

    when's america's image abroad gonna change---for the better?

    when's that meeting gonna go down with the leaders of iran, sans preconditions?

    not just a radical extremist is obama, he's the most incompetent politician at the national level america has ever seen, too

  7. #27
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    so he's off to prague to sign his pretty no-nuke pledge with the puppet master

    except putin TODAY announces he reserves the right to renege

    Russia reserves opt-out of arms treaty with US - Yahoo! News

    the puppet master plays our perplexed prez like a pup

    everyone does

    did you hear what karzai said mere days after obama's surprise visit?

    Karzai Slams the West Again - WSJ.com

    obama's an amateur, over his head, he has no idea what he's doing

  8. #28
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    obama's an amateur, over his head, he has no idea what he's doing
    But at least he knows how to use paragraphs to make his writing readable.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #29
    Advisor LiveUninhibited's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-11-10 @ 03:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    549

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    It's pretty naive to think that nukes can be made obsolete by treaties and announcements of intent. No need to tip your hand. Just quietly develop whatever countermeasures you can.

  10. #30
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    obama the moderate---LOL!

    with the drop of an ill considered word he reverses decades of standing foreign policy, replacing years of thought and research with a typically obamite whim
    Wrong again. It was Bush who reversed decades of policy by announcing he would use nukes whenever he felt like it. Obama is simply returning us to a more considered policy

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •