Defenseless

| February 15, 2012

When President Eisenhower began drawing down the land forces of our military after the Korean War, his policy was dependent on our nuclear arsenal calling it “a bigger bang for the buck”. Now as the Obama Administration is drawing down our armed forces’ capability, he also wants to deplete the nuclear capability, too (Associated Press link);

The Obama administration is weighing options for sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons, The Associated Press has learned.

Even the most modest option now under consideration would be an historic and politically bold disarmament step in a presidential election year, although the plan is in line with President Barack Obama’s 2009 pledge to pursue the elimination of nuclear weapons.

I don’t like nuclear weapons, but they’re a reality in the current climate. With North Korea and Iran, the thugs of the world are getting their grubby paws on nukes and the only reason we haven’t been the victim of our invention is that we’ve always had a greater capability to return the favor to anyone who would them on us.

Now we’re going to unilaterally surrender in the arms race. That’ll work out well for us. If I didn’t know better, I’d think that the President is inviting an invasion.

Thanks to Old Trooper for the link.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Military issues

16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chockblock

Remember, the left’s goal during the cold was was unilateral disarmament. Useful idiots believed that scrapping nukes would make the USSR love us. And the KGB played them like puppets. Then the USSR fell and dried up the support and money for the nuclear freeze/anti-nuke movement.

Still the desire for “no nukes” is the holy grail of the left.

Old Trooper

If he goes forward with the middle cut plan, it would leave us below China. While the argument is that we have enough to blow up the world, which is true, the progressive utopian pipe dream that “if we reduce ours, others will follow our lead” won’t happen and we will be the only one with less than #3 on the list. If we think honestly about it; the delivery systems that we have will, also, go the way of the do-do bird. Maybe Obama should employ some of the “smart diplomacy” and get all the big players to reduce their stockpiles as well, before reducing ours by over half? Let me know how that works out for ya.

Former3c0

I hope this comes with more funding for laser defenses :D.

NHSparky

OT–China has a population of over 1.3 billion.

Nuke their 1000 largest cities, China has a population of 600 million.

That should tell you something right there.

So we have no nuclear deterrence while the Chinese are building up, and we have no conventional capability as the Obama administration is basically eviscerating the military to a degree even Carter would be squeamish about.

Missing anything here?

“WOLVERINES!!!!!”

Get used to hearing that.

Old Trooper

Oh, I’m with ya Sparky. This, if he goes through with it, will be a very dangerous precedent to set. It’s almost like he wants us to get beat up. I have never experienced a President, including Carter, that had so little regard for our country’s security.

trackback

[…] This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive … The Obama administration is weighing options for sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons, The Associated Press has learned. Even the most modest option now … http://valorguardians.com/blog/ — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 05:04:59 -0800 […]

USMC Steve

The Halfrican is a traitor. Nothing less. This pretty well demonstrates it.

ALVIN E THOMAS

Remember what Kruschev said, it may be true, we may bury ourselves!

Yat Yas 1833

Let me get this straight, comrade hobama will cut our nuclear forces while iran’s moumud-mudhead is getting a nuke together. Yeah, makes total sense! That worthless sumbitch.

UpNorth

“WOLVERINES!!!!!” We’ll probably have to get used to seeing Bears flying over New York and D.C., and Venezuelan and Iranian gunboats sailing about 2 miles off the east coast.

gi_janearng

Yet the liberals will still deny up and down that Obama isn’t a military hating person. Oh, ok then.

Jacobite

Un-frickin real. I’m not so concerned about invasion, even the craziest of our current enemies know that’s a lose/lose proposition with guns in over 40% of US households, but deterrence is incredibly important against those who would just like to blacken our eye in a missile slug-fest.

I don’t have a single issue with nukes, and frankly think our arsenal should be sufficient to slag any three enemy nations all at the same time. Not cities, entire nations.

DaveO

Jacobite,

Actually, it’s pretty easy. Consider the examples of the UK, Canada and Australia.

1. We have the right to bear arms. We don’t have a right to ammo, sights, gun oil, bore patches and such.

2. Elect politicos and judges who won’t enforce only certain guns laws, or create a jurisprudence of anti-guns.

3. Currently, felons have lost the right to bear arms. There are so many laws and regulations that carry the weight of law that every US citizen, illegal, and transients commit more than one felony per day. Select the felony to enforce, and away go the guns.

They don’t have to take every single gun, just enough in enough areas. Conservatives will line up to turn in their guns in order to obey the law.

Main about the lack of nukes is not the US of A. All of our allies, and friendly countries, are or perhaps were under our nuclear deterrent umbrella.

No longer. Russia was Germany – no problem. China wants South Korea – no problem.

This will create a race to shift alliances from us to another country. My guess is India. America becomes the next Zimbabwe thanks to Obama and his fellow traitors.

Major Kong

Surprised? He is merely fulfilling his campaign promises:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU4sVQV3Lhk

He told us exactly what he was going to do, and people voted for him anyway.

Cedo Alteram

This is the latest example of the Carter redux, this is out right dangerous! I don’t think this administration even understands the idea of how our nuclear deterrence even works and the expense it entails.

Between the cutting of our conventional forces and now this, it’s just going to compound and excerpate our problems. Our enemies are only going to become more aggressive in the near future. This disarmament is only going to make us and our our allies less safe.

Yat Yas 1833

I didn’t and don’t subscribe to the ‘birther’ thing. I didn’t like what I heard when the comrade was campaigning but refused to consider him this dangerous. Now I’m convinced, he doesn’t care about America or Americans. He’s gonna leave us with our pants down around our ankles and having to rely on ourselves to keep America free. Stevie Wonder can see Iran is after the bomb and this jack-ass wants to hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Screw him with a saguaro cactus.