"Rid the world of Nuclear Weapons": Obama...

[lewpac]

He says "the future of mankind is at stake", and that the U.S. has the "moral responsibility" to lead in this effort, because "no other country has ever used one".

The latter quote is, of course, another swipe at how bad America is, and is responsible for all the ills in the world. Our fearless leader is becoming quite accomplished at dissing America first in order to fulfill his party's mandate: Getting the world to "like us".

Reminds me of a conversation (debate really) I had a while ago with one of these "I don't believe in guns" nuts. This idiot doesn't believe in guns, and says that "anyone who does (NRA, etc...) is evil and part of the problem.

I let him dig his whole, and then reminded him that "yeah, YOU don't believe in guns, but the three thugs coming up your driveway at 2:30 am DO BELIEVE in GUNS..................and NOW you're dead."

In typical, liberal, satiating "bury your head in the sand" fashion.........Obama is touting the already worn out "yes we can", empty rhetoric. He insists that "the world can change".......................

Whoever heard of such a thing? Ever since Cain slew Abel, mankind has never retreated from coming up with new ways to obliterate one another. Yeah, lets get Russia and the U.S. to "call a truce" (as if this hasn't been going on since 1938!), and the rest of the "cumbaya" world will be so inspired by all the good-will that they'll all just fall in line with this "peace" movement.

Honestly, I don't really believe that Obama is this much of an idiot. Really. He clearly must be following the puppet orders he's getting from Soros and others. The only "first" Obama wants is to "weaken America first". He seems to be in perpetual "campaign" mode, so he may be catering to the nutcase-uber left finge. Who knows?

The only language that the animals in North Korea, Iran, China, etc........understand is "you mess with us, we'll kick your ***". Prove me wrong...............Show me any evidence over the generations that these bottom feeders understand anything less than military power and might?

Anyway, I say "Speak LOUDLY and carry THE BIGGEST STICK" in this day and time. The world is a smoldering powder keg. The Middle East has been a ticking time bomb LOOOOOOOONG before George Bush. He just happens to be the only President to tried something, ANYTHING, to get these primates to behave.

Any leader, particularly the President of the United States, who thinks that "backing down" and "downsizing" and "dismantling" in this current climate is either an absolute idiot (Jimmy Carter), or a deliberate sabeture and a traitor to this country.

Pick one. Either way, we're on a particularly dangerous slippery slope..........

[MetalHead]

Wild,isn't it?
Our enemies abroad could not be any luckier.
Barry wants to get rid of nukes...silly Barry.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

Wild,isn't it?
Our enemies abroad could not be any luckier.
Barry wants to get rid of nukes...silly Barry.

Brilliant. Every lunatic in the world is trying to get them and This stupid idiot wants to get rid of them.

[masomenos]

Originally Posted by lewpac

He says "the future of mankind is at stake", and that the U.S. has the "moral responsibility" to lead in this effort, because "no other country has ever used one".

The latter quote is, of course, another swipe at how bad America is, and is responsible for all the ills in the world. Our fearless leader is becoming quite accomplished at dissing America first in order to fulfill his party's mandate: Getting the world to "like us".

Reminds me of a conversation (debate really) I had a while ago with one of these "I don't believe in guns" nuts. This idiot doesn't believe in guns, and says that "anyone who does (NRA, etc...) is evil and part of the problem.

I let him dig his whole, and then reminded him that "yeah, YOU don't believe in guns, but the three thugs coming up your driveway at 2:30 am DO BELIEVE in GUNS..................and NOW you're dead."

[View Full Quote]In typical, liberal, satiating "bury your head in the sand" fashion.........Obama is touting the already worn out "yes we can", empty rhetoric. He insists that "the world can change".......................

Whoever heard of such a thing? Ever since Cain slew Abel, mankind has never retreated from coming up with new ways to obliterate one another. Yeah, lets get Russia and the U.S. to "call a truce" (as if this hasn't been going on since 1938!), and the rest of the "cumbaya" world will be so inspired by all the good-will that they'll all just fall in line with this "peace" movement.

Honestly, I don't really believe that Obama is this much of an idiot. Really. He clearly must be following the puppet orders he's getting from Soros and others. The only "first" Obama wants is to "weaken America first". He seems to be in perpetual "campaign" mode, so he may be catering to the nutcase-uber left finge. Who knows?

The only language that the animals in North Korea, Iran, China, etc........understand is "you mess with us, we'll kick your ***". Prove me wrong...............Show me any evidence over the generations that these bottom feeders understand anything less than military power and might?

Anyway, I say "Speak LOUDLY and carry THE BIGGEST STICK" in this day and time. The world is a smoldering powder keg. The Middle East has been a ticking time bomb LOOOOOOOONG before George Bush. He just happens to be the only President to tried something, ANYTHING, to get these primates to behave.

Any leader, particularly the President of the United States, who thinks that "backing down" and "downsizing" and "dismantling" in this current climate is either an absolute idiot (Jimmy Carter), or a deliberate sabeture and a traitor to this country.

Pick one. Either way, we're on a particularly dangerous slippery slope..........

Unbelievable.

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by masomenos85

Unbelievable.

The truth IS ugly.

[lewpac]

If, (and I stress IF....) masomenos is a detractor to my thoughts, then HE'S THE GUY I was talking about earlier.

These people who think we can negotiate, talk, compromise and barter down our strength to "appease" and "calm" these animals down..............show me the evidence. Just one example. I'm waiting..................

If my neighbor is building a cannon in his living room..............it's taking him months to build it. And I can see that as he's building it, it's pointed toward my house................whaddaya' do?

Do ya' take a bundt cake over there and enter into negotiations with the guy? Do you promise that if he take his cannon apart that "all will be forgiven"?

Or, do you do EVERYTHING IN YOU POWER to get that cannon from not being completed? Including blowing the neighbor up FIRST before his cannon is capable of firing?

It's a very simple anecdote. You can't negotiate with the three guys coming down your driveway, WITH GUNS, at 2:30 in the morning. Tea or no tea, biscuits or no biscuits, there gonna' blow your head off and take your stuff. PERIOD. In fact, the nicer you are to them, the more confident and aggressive their gonna' get.

[masomenos]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

The truth IS ugly.

It's not the truth though, it's an incredibly reactionary and misguided response that doesn't actually cover what Obama said.

Here is a much longer quote from the speech...

So today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. (Applause.) I'm not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly -- perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, "Yes, we can." (Applause.)


[View Full Quote]Now, let me describe to you the trajectory we need to be on. First, the United States will take concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons. To put an end to Cold War thinking, we will reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urge others to do the same. Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies -- including the Czech Republic. But we will begin the work of reducing our arsenal.


To reduce our warheads and stockpiles, we will negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with the Russians this year. (Applause.) President Medvedev and I began this process in London, and will seek a new agreement by the end of this year that is legally binding and sufficiently bold. And this will set the stage for further cuts, and we will seek to include all nuclear weapons states in this endeavor.


To achieve a global ban on nuclear testing, my administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. (Applause.) After more than five decades of talks, it is time for the testing of nuclear weapons to finally be banned.


And to cut off the building blocks needed for a bomb, the United States will seek a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons. If we are serious about stopping the spread of these weapons, then we should put an end to the dedicated production of weapons-grade materials that create them. That's the first step.


Second, together we will strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a basis for cooperation.


The basic bargain is sound: Countries with nuclear weapons will move towards disarmament, countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them, and all countries can access peaceful nuclear energy. To strengthen the treaty, we should embrace several principles. We need more resources and authority to strengthen international inspections. We need real and immediate consequences for countries caught breaking the rules or trying to leave the treaty without cause.


And we should build a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation, including an international fuel bank, so that countries can access peaceful power without increasing the risks of proliferation. That must be the right of every nation that renounces nuclear weapons, especially developing countries embarking on peaceful programs. And no approach will succeed if it's based on the denial of rights to nations that play by the rules. We must harness the power of nuclear energy on behalf of our efforts to combat climate change, and to advance peace opportunity for all people.


But we go forward with no illusions. Some countries will break the rules. That's why we need a structure in place that ensures when any nation does, they will face consequences.


Just this morning, we were reminded again of why we need a new and more rigorous approach to address this threat. North Korea broke the rules once again by testing a rocket that could be used for long range missiles. This provocation underscores the need for action -- not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons.


Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something. The world must stand together to prevent the spread of these weapons. Now is the time for a strong international response -- (applause) -- now is the time for a strong international response, and North Korea must know that the path to security and respect will never come through threats and illegal weapons. All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime. And that's why we must stand shoulder to shoulder to pressure the North Koreans to change course.


Iran has yet to build a nuclear weapon. My administration will seek engagement with Iran based on mutual interests and mutual respect. We believe in dialogue. (Applause.) But in that dialogue we will present a clear choice. We want Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations, politically and economically. We will support Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy with rigorous inspections. That's a path that the Islamic Republic can take. Or the government can choose increased isolation, international pressure, and a potential nuclear arms race in the region that will increase insecurity for all.


So let me be clear: Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran's neighbors and our allies. The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles. As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven. (Applause.) If the Iranian threat is eliminated, we will have a stronger basis for security, and the driving force for missile defense construction in Europe will be removed. (Applause.)


So, finally, we must ensure that terrorists never acquire a nuclear weapon. This is the most immediate and extreme threat to global security. One terrorist with one nuclear weapon could unleash massive destruction. Al Qaeda has said it seeks a bomb and that it would have no problem with using it. And we know that there is unsecured nuclear material across the globe. To protect our people, we must act with a sense of purpose without delay.


So today I am announcing a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years. We will set new standards, expand our cooperation with Russia, pursue new partnerships to lock down these sensitive materials.


We must also build on our efforts to break up black markets, detect and intercept materials in transit, and use financial tools to disrupt this dangerous trade. Because this threat will be lasting, we should come together to turn efforts such as the Proliferation Security Initiative and the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism into durable international institutions. And we should start by having a Global Summit on Nuclear Security that the United States will host within the next year. (Applause.)

Not scary, not ugly, not setting the nation up for an attack.

[masomenos]

Originally Posted by lewpac

If, (and I stress IF....) masomenos is a detractor to my thoughts, then HE'S THE GUY I was talking about earlier.

These people who think we can negotiate, talk, compromise and barter down our strength to "appease" and "calm" these animals down..............show me the evidence. Just one example. I'm waiting..................

If my neighbor is building a cannon in his living room..............it's taking him months to build it. And I can see that as he's building it, it's pointed toward my house................whaddaya' do?

Do ya' take a bundt cake over there and enter into negotiations with the guy? Do you promise that if he take his cannon apart that "all will be forgiven"?

Or, do you do EVERYTHING IN YOU POWER to get that cannon from not being completed? Including blowing the neighbor up FIRST before his cannon is capable of firing?

[View Full Quote]It's a very simple anecdote. You can't negotiate with the three guys coming down your driveway, WITH GUNS, at 2:30 in the morning. Tea or no tea, biscuits or no biscuits, there gonna' blow your head off and take your stuff. PERIOD. In fact, the nicer you are to them, the more confident and aggressive their gonna' get.

Read my response to Artie.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

In the end, only the big Five are supposed to have nuclear weapons, US, China, Russia, UK and France. Problem is at least four other nations also have them, Israel, South Africa, Pakistan and India.

I doubt any of the big five would use them, but I don't trust the other four.

[Beast_from_East]

Nice way to selectively pick and choose quotes from Obama's speech to further yalls agenda.

Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies -- including the Czech Republic. But we will begin the work of reducing our arsenal.


Obama cleary states that the US will maintain an effective arsenal of nuclear weapons as deteriants, but will work on reducing the # or warheads we have stockpiled.

You guys do realize it was Reagan who negotiated one of the first nuclear reduction treaties with the Solviet Union. Reagan said "trust, but verify" when talking about the treaty and the US and the USSR and both sides sent observers to watch the missles being destroyed and ICBM silos had to be openned periodicly for US and USSR spy satellites to picture the empty silos to make sure neither side was cheating.


What Obama is suggesting is basically the same thing, reduce the # of warheads to a reasonable amount (say 1200 or so) and destroy the remaining as long as other countries follow our lead.

[lewpac]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

Nice way to selectively pick and choose quotes from Obama's speech to further yalls agenda.

Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies -- including the Czech Republic. But we will begin the work of reducing our arsenal.


Obama cleary states that the US will maintain an effective arsenal of nuclear weapons as deteriants, but will work on reducing the # or warheads we have stockpiled.

[View Full Quote]You guys do realize it was Reagan who negotiated one of the first nuclear reduction treaties with the Solviet Union. Reagan said "trust, but verify" when talking about the treaty and the US and the USSR and both sides sent observers to watch the missles being destroyed and ICBM silos had to be openned periodicly for US and USSR spy satellites to picture the empty silos to make sure neither side was cheating.


What Obama is suggesting is basically the same thing, reduce the # of warheads to a reasonable amount (say 1200 or so) and destroy the remaining as long as other countries follow our lead.

"as long as other countries follow our lead" huh.................

Therein lies the rub. Therein ALWAYS lies the rub. Therein is where the machine breaks down.................

You uber-peacenick-lefty "cumbaya" folks just don't get it. You never will.
Everything is always "and then THEY'LL do it to". But, they never do.

When was the last time you ever saw an "Iran" "come to the peace table" to lay down arms? How 'bout N. Korea? China? How come these folks NEVER come to the table bearing olive branches? Why is it ALWAYS US who, if we don't concede something, then all bets are off?

North Korea just set off some kind of weapon last night. Obama and the U.N. are "talking" about getting tough about it. Nothing will come of it. What are they gonna' do? Stop shipping rice over there?

This crap has been going on since, like I said, since Cain slew Abel. Talk, talk, talk, threaten, threaten, threaten.....................nothing happens.

The only two guys who actually DID something about it were Reagan and Bush................and the uber-60's Obama-heads lost their minds. But, they got something done. I don't care why Bush invaded Iraq. WMD, revenge for the old man, Haliburton, whatever..................at least someone finally DID SOMETHING to get SOMEONES attention.

It's the ONLY language these vermin know.............

[The30YardSlant]

Obama is so out of touch

[Jon88]

Originally Posted by lewpac

Anyway, I say "Speak LOUDLY and carry THE BIGGEST STICK" in this day and time. The world is a smoldering powder keg. The Middle East has been a ticking time bomb LOOOOOOOONG before George Bush. He just happens to be the only President to tried something, ANYTHING, to get these primates to behave.
Pick one. Either way, we're on a particularly dangerous slippery slope..........

That's hilarious. And true.

[Beast_from_East]

Originally Posted by lewpac

"as long as other countries follow our lead" huh.................

Therein lies the rub. Therein ALWAYS lies the rub. Therein is where the machine breaks down.................

You uber-peacenick-lefty "cumbaya" folks just don't get it. You never will.
Everything is always "and then THEY'LL do it to". But, they never do.

When was the last time you ever saw an "Iran" "come to the peace table" to lay down arms? How 'bout N. Korea? China? How come these folks NEVER come to the table bearing olive branches? Why is it ALWAYS US who, if we don't concede something, then all bets are off?

North Korea just set off some kind of weapon last night. Obama and the U.N. are "talking" about getting tough about it. Nothing will come of it. What are they gonna' do? Stop shipping rice over there?

[View Full Quote]This crap has been going on since, like I said, since Cain slew Abel. Talk, talk, talk, threaten, threaten, threaten.....................nothing happens.

The only two guys who actually DID something about it were Reagan and Bush................and the uber-60's Obama-heads lost their minds. But, they got something done. I don't care why Bush invaded Iraq. WMD, revenge for the old man, Haliburton, whatever..................at least someone finally DID SOMETHING to get SOMEONES attention.

It's the ONLY language these vermin know.............

I am not saying to totally disarm, I agree 100% that we have to have a nucler arsenal as a deterient.

I am sure you know about MAD (mutually assured destruction) and that is the whole reason that the Cold War never turned into an actual war. We knew that if we launched, so would the Solviets and if they launched, we would retalitate. After we exchanged a couple of thousand warheads there would be nothing but bacteria left on the planet.

What Obama is suggesting is no different. The new round of reductions the White House wants with the Russians would reduce our stockpile of nuclear warheads to around 1000.

1000 nuclear warheads is still enough to blow the planet up several hundered times over, so the doctrine of MAD will still exist.

So what is so controversial about reducing our warheads from 9000 or so down to 1000???? (whats the problem with this)

[Jon88]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

So what is so controversial about reducing our warheads from 9000 or so down to 1000???? (whats the problem with this)

What's wrong with keeping them?