Why President Obama's Nuclear Weapons Policy Is Dangerous

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Just a reader. I know this sounds strang but i think your right because its true it will only take a few bombs to destroy the entire world but having said that the deternt of many nucular bombs sound like a bigger deterent to me.I understand that only a few is a strong deterent but many make more on one when thinking numbers.And the devils into details so mad men military leader from North korea only see it as there few to our many anyway and Obama lowering the stock pill and closeing the program of our nucular plants in California seen stupid indeed.Also want to point out i don't have all the facts as you probly seen.And i may never get this read or see a response....But felt like writing this anyway.
GL And God Bless.

Stuart Lange of CA 12:07PM April 05, 2013

It's very simple why our president is willing to expose us to lethal danger, he hates America. Once our nuclear deterrent is gone, we will suffer a nuclear attack on our soil. Millions of Americans will die. Obama and his ilk don't care, it will simply give them another crisis to seize our freedom with.

Fred of NV 1:26PM February 25, 2013

It is pathetic to believe that 1,500+ Deployed currently in our hands (ready to use) nuclear weapons are not enough to destroy an enemy or rather, the entire world? Besides other nations having a nuclear device, it is the deliverability that matters and any nation using a nuclear device against the U.S. or an Ally would be destroyed within hours either by our Strategic Bombers, Ballistic Missiles and or our world-leading Nuclear Carrier Strike Forces. This is political hype that we are now weak and what we do not need is a bloated military that will help to defeat the Unites States as it bankrupted Russia. The United States remains the worlds premier superpower and is modernizing its forces to meet the challenges that are real, not political hype.

Joe Castron of FL 3:28PM October 14, 2012

Info taken off the WH blog if thats worth anything. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/02/new-start-treaty-signed

Truth of PA 6:10PM August 30, 2012

Today the President ratified a landmark nuclear arms treaty with Russia, New START. As the President said during the end of the last Congress, the treaty is "a national security imperative" as well as "a cornerstone of our relations with Russia" as we continue to work with them on everything from Iran to Afghanistan. With the Senate having approved the treaty with a strong bipartisan vote late last year, today's signing marks a final step in the process. That process began when President Obama and President Medvedev initially signed the agreement in Prague last April, a fitting location given that one year before that President Obama had been there for a major speech commiting to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.
You can read the Treaty (pdf) and Protocol (pdf) themselves, but here's a quick overview from our fact sheet at the time:
Strategic Offensive Reductions: Under the Treaty, the U.S. and Russia will be limited to significantly fewer strategic arms within seven years from the date the Treaty enters into force. Each Party has the flexibility to determine for itself the structure of its strategic forces within the aggregate limits of the Treaty. These limits are based on a rigorous analysis conducted by Department of Defense planners in support of the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.
Aggregate limits:
1,550 warheads. Warheads on deployed ICBMs and deployed SLBMs count toward this limit and each deployed heavy bomber equipped for nuclear armaments counts as one warhead toward this limit.
This limit is 74% lower than the limit of the 1991 START Treaty and 30% lower than the deployed strategic warhead limit of the 2002 Moscow Treaty.
A combined limit of 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.
A separate limit of 700 deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.
This limit is less than half the corresponding strategic nuclear delivery vehicle limit of the START Treaty.

Truth of PA 6:07PM August 30, 2012

There are so many factual errors in this column, I would not even know where to start. If the facts are in such disarray, I have trouble accepting the analysis and conclusions. The Administration didn't announce a reduction of 80%, a press report quoted an unnamed source (with an agenda) that the Admin was considering such a reduction as one of many options. The comparison of total stockpile size during the Cold War (over 30,000 warheads) with future deployed number (1,550 by 2018) is invalid. Compare deployed with deployed or stockpile with stockpile. The Administration does not have a plan to eliminate ICBMs; current policy strongly supports all three legs of the triad, although the Air Force has talked about delaying nuclear capability on new bomber.
Get your facts straight, and maybe I'll consider your conclusions....

anon of MD 1:35PM April 30, 2012

ps
*~~~~~John of NY (R. Paul groupy)~~~~~* MITT is about 300 delegates away from win. r.p. about 1,000. That’s REAL CLOSE ??? SPITTING DISTANCE RIGHT ??? I WONDER why THEY COUNT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ron paul is O U T...
I might as well look it up. You won't and prove you lied. Paul has won Iowa & Minnesota. Saturday LA. THAT IS 5 John ? Did I miss 2 States ???
I want the 5 States NAMES you say RP HAS WON. NOT what RP MIGHT WIN. COULD WIN. Thinking about RP. Leaning towards. Etc..
JOHN, DID YOU LIE ??? As I showed, TEA party IS NOT supporting R.P. . Can’t ask you to prove your statements. You don’t like to. You think is MY JOB. Likely you don't want to show YOU ARE FULL OF IT. And that's not full of TRUTH..
___
“Updated 4:29 p.m. ET, Apr 25, 2012
“RESULTS: Democrats | Republicans”
“TOTAL DELEGATES”
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/3.0/election/2012/03_candidates/story_bios/out-candidates-52x52/bachmann-52x52.jpg
“Mitt Romney
Pledged*: 792
Unpledged RNC*: 49
Total: 841
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/3.0/election/2012/03_candidates/story_bios/candidates-52x52/gingrich-52x52.jpg
Newt Gingrich
Pledged*: 138
Unpledged RNC*: 3
Total: 141
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/3.0/election/2012/03_candidates/story_bios/out-candidates-52x52/huntsman-52x52.jpg
Ron Paul
Pledged*: 76
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 76
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/3.0/election/2012/03_candidates/story_bios/candidates-52x52/paul-52x52.jpg
Rick Santorum
Pledged*: 273
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 273
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/3.0/election/2012/03_candidates/story_bios/out-candidates-52x52/perry-52x52.jpg
Delegates Needed to Win: 1,144 ”
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r

Bill Hedges of MO 2:24AM April 30, 2012

*~~~~John of NY ~~~~~~* WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ??? Don't forget PROOF...
I suppose you are a “patriot ”. So “educate” me. WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
AM SURE will be a LONG WAIT FOR YOUR ANSWER. Plenty more insults to divert attention away from the fact that you DID NOT ANSWER:
JOHN, WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
*~~~~John of NY ~~~~~~* WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
I suppose you are a “patriot ”. So “educate” me. WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
JOHN, WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
*~~~~John of NY ~~~~~~* WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
I suppose you are a “patriot ”. So “educate” me. WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???
AM SURE will be a LONG WAIT FOR YOUR ANSWER. Plenty more insults to divert attention away from the fact that you DID NOT ANSWER:
JOHN, WHAT ARE THE 5 STATES R. PAUL WON ???

Bill Hedges of MO 2:42PM April 29, 2012

Bill Hedges, you're a silly little fellow who likes to chase people out of the Republican Party that you claim is Your's. It's nice when you stay in the party, though, and patriots educate you bit by bit :) We can learn to like you (laughing...
Seems your point is that dems also believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.. cool point, a point of agreement with us then.
Regarding Hitler, you will want to make the Neville Chamberlain analogy as appeaser of Hitler. You forget that England and France had weak armies and a mistaken confidence in the maginot line. Negotiate from weakness, get clobbered.. common sense.
The USA has the military might of the rest of the world combined.. it's time for US to take the lead and say "let's stop the slaughter of civilians". When the paradigm is non aggression.. others stop craving bigger pop guns.. see?
Peace through Strength. Ron Paul for President 2012~
Veteran 1963-1968

John of NY 1:08PM April 29, 2012

John of NY
Instead of retreat into insulting me, remember what you previously wrote before my remark. That would be:
“Like Teddy Roosevelt "Speak softly and carry a big stick". Create an atmosphere of non threat, trade and cooperation. Discourage people from wanting more and better arms by showing they won't be attacked”. We and U.N. tried that route and inspectors were booted out. Material of nuclear standards were stopped from shipment to Iraq.
My earlier quote was answer to that. There is reason for my remarks. You just don’t see. You see Paul as our next Head Man without cause to believe.:
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Bush was wanted impeached:
Video_ “Clinton Iraq War WMD Speech in 1998 Desert Fox Bush Lied? P1 ”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps9j22G9HLE
(video disproves this) You also wrote “Keep strong and don't bother anyone, and no one will bother you. ” That failed with Hitler & in Iraq among other places.
You wrote “The public and certainly most or many politicians were convinced of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as you quote”. How you forget Bush was blamed. Democrats forgetting their quotes and did blame Bush when no WMD was found. Faulty characterization John:
Paul’s delegate COUNT are SO SMALL. BOTTOM OF THE BARREL. NO CHANCE PAUL. HAVE provided the count tonight...
Keep insulting me. Won’t cause me to leave though. Makes me more determined...

Bill Hedges of MO 5:47AM April 29, 2012