Submit your comments on this article |
Home Front: WoT |
New B.O. policy limits US use of nuclear arms |
2010-04-07 |
![]() Right. Stern. They're quakin' and shakin' down in Olde Pyongyang and Terrorhan. You betcha. Kicking off a hectic week for President Barack Obama's nuclear agenda, his aides rolled out a strategy review that renounced U.S. development of new atomic weapons and could herald further cuts in America's stockpile. "The world will be a safer place when we're unarmed." The announcement, calling for reduced U.S. reliance on its nuclear deterrent, could build momentum before Obama signs a landmark arms control treaty with Russia in Prague on Thursday and hosts a nuclear security summit in Washington next week. Momentum to what? But Obama's revamped strategy is likely to draw criticism from conservatives who say his approach could compromise U.S. national security and disappoint liberals who wanted the president to go further on arms control. Under the revamped policy, the United States for the first time is forswearing use of atomic weapons against non-nuclear countries, a break with a Bush-era threat of nuclear retaliation in the event of a biological or chemical attack. But the new strategy comes with a major condition that the countries will be spared a U.S. nuclear response only if they are in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That loophole means Iran and North Korea would not be protected. "If there is a message for Iran and North Korea here, it is that if you're going to play by the rules, if you're going to join the international community, then we will undertake certain obligations to you," U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said. "But if you're not going to play by the rules, if you're going to be a proliferator, then all options are on the table in terms of how we deal with you," he told reporters. "Extreme circumstances" The Nuclear Posture Review, as the policy document is known, stated: "The threat of global nuclear war has become remote, but the risk of nuclear attack has increased." The NPR is required by Congress from every U.S. administration but Obama set expectations high after he vowed to end "Cold War thinking" and won the Nobel Peace Prize partially for his vision of a nuclear-free world. Seeking to set an example, the Obama administration said the United States would consider use of nuclear weapons only in "extreme circumstances" and committed to not developing any new nuclear warheads. But it said that while reducing the role of nuclear weapons in national security, the United States would strengthen its conventional arsenal. "We have other means of deterrence that we can increase our reliance on, such as missile defenses, such as non-nuclear strike capabilities," a senior U.S. defense official said. The administration also pledged to pursue further arms control with Russia beyond the new START pact Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will sign this week promising to slash nuclear arsenals by a third. "The United States will pursue high-level, bilateral dialogues on strategic stability with both Russia and China which are aimed at fostering more stable, resilient, and transparent strategic relationships," it said. But the Obama administration said the lack of transparency surrounding China's nuclear programs raises questions about the country's future strategic intentions. "China's nuclear arsenal remains much smaller than the arsenals of Russia and the United States," the document said. "But the lack of transparency surrounding its nuclear programs -- their pace and scope, as well as the strategy and doctrine that guides them -- raises questions about China's future strategic intentions." |
Posted by:Fred |
#18 dont blame me, I know what niggardly and condone mean. Blame the dumbass troll. |
Posted by: Thains Untervehr9750 2010-04-07 21:03 |
#17 CB7582 stop feeding the trolls or be considered one yourself. - annoyed mod |
Posted by: lotp 2010-04-07 18:54 |
#16 I can always get one with niggardly. They're too easy! And condone? "You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means". |
Posted by: Cheresh Black7582 2010-04-07 18:22 |
#15 Posted by: Grising McGurque4957 Our old friend Play4Keeps. The man is not only a troll, he apparently has the vocabulary of a not very bright kindergartner. |
Posted by: trailing wife 2010-04-07 16:41 |
#14 Policy on this means nothing. This is propaganda and not worth the ink it takes to print it. Two second before pulling thetriggeron a nuke, the pres can have a policy change. Afterall, policy is not law, and the pres giving policy to control only his actions in crisis is dumb. |
Posted by: 49 Pan 2010-04-07 13:42 |
#13 Fool. I can't wait for 2012. |
Posted by: lex 2010-04-07 10:48 |
#12 Meanwhile in related domestic disarmament news: The United Nations and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are moving forward with their plan to confiscate your guns. The United States joined 152 other countries in support of the Arms Trade Treaty Resolution, which establishes the dates for the 2012 UN conference intended to attack American sovereignty by stripping Americans of the right to keep and bear arms. Former United Nation’s ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners about the Arms Trade Treaty and says the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.” |
Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-07 09:36 |
#11 So would BO tell his Secret Service to go home or recommend they be reassigned since they are not needed anymore? I'm sure would-be assassins would say: "O.K. I'm going to change my ways; I've seen the light. Obama has inspired me." |
Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-07 08:54 |
#10 Jimmy Carter is looking more and more like the best case scenario. |
Posted by: Black Bart Ebberens7700 2010-04-07 06:51 |
#9 "Devastating Conventional Retaliation" is no credible deterrent. There was no such retaliation after 9/11. It won't happen now or in the future even in case a chemical attack kills a couple of thousand Americans or Europeans, the feelings of enemy civilians could be hurt after all. NATO 1949-2010 RIP There's another aspect to this: Obama will now pressure Israel to forswear nuclear retaliation in case of an attack with biological or chemical weapons by Syria/Hezbollah/Iran. |
Posted by: Jiggs Gleatle9493 2010-04-07 06:29 |
#8 Posted by Grising McGurque4957 You may wish to have a look at your Websters. |
Posted by: Besoeker 2010-04-07 04:52 |
#7 FREEREPUBLIC > NEW US NUCLEAR POLICY FOCUSES ON TERRORISTS, ROGUE STATES. * SAME > [USN] NAVY CHANGES OR US POWER FADES. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2010-04-07 03:20 |
#6 Barb! I'm setting up the lawn chairs and we'll be needing some popcorn soon. |
Posted by: gorb 2010-04-07 02:53 |
#5 #4 I would have used the word niggardly instead of stingy, but I don't think the trolls could take it, especially when talking about the chosen one. Posted by: Cheresh Black7582 2010-04-07 01:56 And is this what rantburg stands for????? If not condone this type of talk really plain and simple. |
Posted by: Grising McGurque4957 2010-04-07 02:30 |
#4 I would have used the word niggardly instead of stingy, but I don't think the trolls could take it, especially when talking about the chosen one. |
Posted by: Cheresh Black7582 2010-04-07 01:56 |
#3 New B.O. policy limits US use of nuclear arms. Seems like we're already kinda stingy with em' to me. Do we really need another policy on that? |
Posted by: Cheresh Black7582 2010-04-07 01:54 |
#2 YAHOO/OTHER > OBAMA: NUCLEAR TERRORISM [+ NucProliferation] THE TOP THREAT TO US. Again, IMO Year 2012 > PAN-ISLAMIST NUCLEARIZATION > IRAN declares it has Nukes. * Also IMO, POST-2012 ASAP ATAP > RADICAL ISLAM, MILTERRS declare they now possess NUKES = ADVANCED WMDS = NBC-CBRN(E)? WEAPS/MILTECHS. IMO the Islamists can't wait for Year 2020 for the USA to improve + deploy EFFECTIVE RELIABLE GMD-TMD IN MIDEAST + AROUND THE WORLD. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2010-04-07 01:09 |
#1 Uh, uh, OWG-US MISSLE DEFENSE NEEDS TARP + OBAMACARE??? Gut nuthin. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2010-04-07 00:16 |