Obama ready to slash US nuclear arsenal - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 5 (permalink) Old 09-21-2009, 08:57 AM Thread Starter
Meeeeooowww
 
ALLAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the MCO airport
Posts: 20,309
Obama ready to slash US nuclear arsenal

Pentagon told to map out radical cuts as president prepares to chair UN talks


•Julian Borger
•guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 September 2009 21.30 BST

Barack Obama has demanded the Pentagon conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country's arsenal, the Guardian can reveal.

Obama has rejected the Pentagon's first draft of the "nuclear posture review" as being too timid, and has called for a range of more far-reaching options consistent with his goal of eventually abolishing nuclear weapons altogether, according to European officials.

Those options include:
• Reconfiguring the US nuclear force to allow for an arsenal measured in hundreds rather than thousands of deployed strategic warheads.
• Redrafting nuclear doctrine to narrow the range of conditions under which the US would use nuclear weapons.
• Exploring ways of guaranteeing the future reliability of nuclear weapons without testing or producing a new generation of warheads.

The review is due to be completed by the end of this year, and European officials say the outcome is not yet clear. But one official said: "Obama is now driving this process. He is saying these are the president's weapons, and he wants to look again at the doctrine and their role."

The move comes as Obama prepares to take the rare step of chairing a watershed session of the UN security council on Thursday. It is aimed at winning consensus on a new grand bargain: exchanging more radical disarmament by nuclear powers in return for wider global efforts to prevent further proliferation.

That bargain is at the heart of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which is up for review next year amid signs it is unravelling in the face of Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions.

In an article for the Guardian today, the foreign secretary, David Miliband, argues that failure to win a consensus would be disastrous. "This is one of the most critical issues we face," the foreign secretary writes. "Get it right, and we will increase global security, pave the way for a world without nuclear weapons, and improve access to affordable, safe and dependable energy – vital to tackle climate change. Get it wrong, and we face the spread of nuclear weapons and the chilling prospect of nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists."

According to a final draft of the resolution due to be passed on Thursday, however, the UN security council will not wholeheartedly embrace the US and Britain's call for eventual abolition of nuclear weapons. Largely on French insistence, the council will endorse the vaguer aim of seeking "to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons".

Gordon Brown is due to use this week's UN general assembly meeting to renew a diplomatic offensive on Iran for its failure to comply with security council demands that it suspend enrichment of uranium. The issue has been given greater urgency by an International Atomic Energy Agency document leaked last week which showed inspectors for the agency believed Iran already had "sufficient information" to build a warhead, and had tested an important component of a nuclear device.

Germany is also expected to toughen its position on Iran ahead of a showdown between major powers and the Iranian government on 1 October. But it is not yet clear what position will be taken by Russia, which has hitherto opposed the imposition of further sanctions on Iran.

Moscow's stance will be closely watched for signs of greater co-operation in return for Obama's decision last week to abandon a missile defence scheme in eastern Europe, a longstanding source of irritation to Russia.

"I hope the Russians realise they have to do something serious. I don't think a deal has been done, but there is a great deal of expectation," said a British official.

Russia has approximately 2,780 deployed strategic warheads, compared with around 2,100 in the US. The abandonment of the US missile defence already appears to have spurred arms control talks currently underway between Washington and Moscow: the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, said today that chances were "quite high" that a deal to reduce arsenals to 1,500 warheads each would be signed by the end of the year.

The US nuclear posture review is aimed at clearing the path for a new round of deep US-Russian cuts to follow almost immediately after that treaty is ratified, to set lower limits not just on deployed missiles but also on the thousands of warheads both have in their stockpiles.

The Obama strategy is to create disarmament momentum in the run-up to the non-proliferation treaty review conference next May, in the hope that states without nuclear weapons will not side with Iran, as they did at the last review in 2005, but endorse stronger legal barriers to nuclear proliferation, and forego nuclear weapons programmes themselves.

"The review has up to now been in the hands of mid-level bureaucrats with a lot of knowledge, but it's knowledge drawn from the cold war. What they are prepared to do is tweak the existing doctrine," said Rebecca Johnson, the head of the Acronym Institute, a pro-disarmament pressure group.

"Obama has sent them it back saying: 'Give me more options for what we can do in line with my goals. I'm not saying it's easy, but all you're giving me is business as usual.'"



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...uclear-weapons

ALLAN is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 5 (permalink) Old 09-21-2009, 09:42 AM
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
I would be OK with a major cutback but only if they follow the Trust but Verify framework that Reagan established. We could cut our nuclear arsenal in half and still have a GARGANTUAN advantage on all adversaries.

Also, getting the Russians to cut their arsenal makes it easier for them to secure those warheads.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
post #3 of 5 (permalink) Old 09-21-2009, 04:27 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 262
While I think its great that the US and Russia are once AGAIN in disarmament talks, when was the last time your biggest fear was Russian ICBMs tearing through the atmosphere above North Texas?

Anyone?.... Folks, these guys can barely maintain a coherent Navy and Air Force.

Sukhoi relies on foreign orders of aircraft to stay alive.

Half their 1980s Navy is either rusted or inoperable.... I guarantee 40% of these "nucs" are crap that would be lucky to make it through their first stage after launch.

The Russian need money, hence why they love the money and goods currently coming in from, you guessed it... Iran.

Either way, the Russians do not worry me....

Iran, on the other hand, is the foremost sponsor of terrorism and may ALREADY have an operable nuke.... They have an entire network of Jihadis and radicals....

Why would they need to develop an ICBM when a truck, van, train, or cargo ship\container works just as well. Its not like the UN boards or inspects this crap anyway....

On the other side of the world, you have a dying, twisted "Dear Leader" who would like nothing more than to go out in a blaze of glory currently developing long range weapons.... who just happens to have VERY GOOD contacts with Iran.

The UN is a den of thieves and idiots, and the thieves love to use the idiots.
(I guess that's why Barry is all about it)

I think I'll use a little Shakespeare when describing the UN:

...... a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

88Kaufmann is offline  
 
post #4 of 5 (permalink) Old 09-21-2009, 05:36 PM
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
I agree with you. The Russian's don't worry me. I just think a huge arms cut will make it less likely that their nukes will fall into the wrong hands.

BTW, I'm not nearly as worried about Iran as I am about Pakistan. The Pakistani's HAVE NUKES. It should scare the shit out of everyone that the Taliban controls a good sized portion of that country.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
post #5 of 5 (permalink) Old 09-21-2009, 05:40 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Beavis View Post
I agree with you. The Russian's don't worry me. I just think a huge arms cut will make it less likely that their nukes will fall into the wrong hands.

BTW, I'm not nearly as worried about Iran as I am about Pakistan. The Pakistani's HAVE NUKES. It should scare the shit out of everyone that the Taliban controls a good sized portion of that country.
Agreed.... scary stuff all the way around....

88Kaufmann is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome