Reply With QuoteThank God for King Barry.
US edging toward decision on new nuclear arms cuts
Thank God for King Barry.
We will always keep the nukes in the inventory, and should have more than we need. To completely get rid of them is fantasy.
Berry believes if he says there is a nuke free world, there is a nuke free world. Doesn't matter what the reality is.Originally Posted by G-AWZT
Barry King wants the other side to have all the nukes.
Gotta love the leftist mind or lack thereof.
But, but, but, if we cut back our nukes, than they will HAVE to cut back theirs!
Its a flawless plan! Really!
Read more here.Congressional Republicans and right-wing institutions have criticized the administration for preparing reckless unilateral cuts that jeopardize U.S. security.
As it turns out, Republican presidents have been the biggest nuclear reducers in the post-Cold War era. Republican presidents seem to have a thing for 50 percent nuclear reductions.
During the George H.W. Bush presidency from 1989-1993, the size of the U.S. nuclear stockpile was cut by nearly 50 percent from 22,217 to 11,511 warheads. The number of deployed strategic warheads dropped from 12,300 to 7,114, or 42 percent, during the same period.
Likewise, during the George W. Bush presidency from 2001-2009, the stockpile was cut by nearly 50 percent from 10,526 to 5,113 warheads. The number of deployed strategic warheads was cut by 65 percent from 5,668 to 1,968 warheads.
A reduction to 1,000-1,100 would be about 30 percent below the New START treaty limit, a drop similar to the 30 percent reduction between the New START treaty and the Moscow Treaty ceiling of 2,200 warheads. A reduction to 300-400 would be a reduction of approximately 77 percent – right up there with the Bush cuts of the past two decades.
Those Bushies must have been reckless liberals in disguise.
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/02/...ndisarmers.php
The difference is the Bushies negotiated comparable reductions on the Russian's part (and outright nuclear disarmament on the part of the other former Soviet republics), something Barry doesn't seem worried about. At all. Still, I'm sure Tsar Putin will appreciate the gesture and thank Barry appropriately....
As long as they do not touch the SSBNs I will not be overly concerned. The Ohio class and Trident replacement programs need to be fully funded and procurement needs to match what is being retired.
I think they should start by getting rid of these large scale nuclear missiles, by international agreements. A lot of people would have a better feeling about world politics if that kind of "dooms day" weapons did not exist. I don't think anyone can grip the reality of what it means to flatten an entire city, killing millions of ordinary people. It's just out of proportion of anything else. And yet those weapons exists today.
I worry that the replacements for the SSBNs and the ballistic missiles (and warheads) they carry won't be ready in time.
And they've done a better job of preventing large scale conflict than any other weapon in history.
At 1000 Strategic Nukes it would still be larger than Nukes of other nations in P-5 + 3
While US and Russia still have 3000 - 4000 sub strategic Nukes each that are out of any reduction agreement.
Well right now the US has more nukes then Russia. shows who really wants a reduction in nuclear arms.
Last edited by my name again; 07-04-2012 at 01:00 PM.
And for scaring the crap out of ordinary people world wide including the US...
Posting Permissions
