Only a fool can't see that Obama is planning for big cuts to the NNSA
weapons labs. His nominee for the DoD, Chuck Hagel, is a member of Goal
Zero and has a dislike for all things nuclear. The New York Times
article below confirms suspicions of what's to come. :
Obama to Renew Drive for Cuts in Nuclear Arms
By DAVID E. SANGER
NY Times: February 10, 2013
WASHINGTON
— President Obama will use his State of the Union speech on Tuesday to
reinvigorate one of his signature national security objectives —
drastically reducing nuclear arsenals around the world — after securing
agreement in recent months with the United States military that the
American nuclear force can be cut in size by roughly a third.
....But
Mr. Obama is already moving quietly, officials acknowledge, to explore
whether he can scale back a 10-year, $80 billion program to modernize
the country’s weapons laboratories.
The White House agreed to the
spending on the weapons labs as the price of winning Republican votes
on the new Start three years ago, but one senior defense official said
late last year that “the environment of looking for cuts in the national
security budget makes this an obvious target.”
www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/us/politics/ obama-to-renew-drive-for-cuts-in-nuclear -arms.html?_r=0
18 comments:
Anonymous said...
Well with the new North Korea test I think it is time to slash some NNSA budgets. 405
February 12, 2013 at 7:05 AM
Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Yeah we need an arms race with a backwards pariah state like we need a hole in the head. Take the money out of the labs and put that money into conventional weaponry, satellites, and drone technology.
February 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM
Delete
To the Republican Senators who voted for START II based on the promises of Obama to increase funding for the decrepit and slowly dissolving capabilities of the US nuclear weapon labs.... SUCKERS !!!!!
There is no evidence that nuclear deterrence works. The Soviet Union is more powerful now than ever. The Soviet what, you say? What is that, you say?
That's right. Our programs will not deter proliferation. It will deter war. But NK has no incentive for launching a first strike anyways. They want to develop nuke tipped missiles to show off and stick it to international community. Maybe they will edge closer to threatening US allies once they have developed reliable long range nuclear strike capabilities.
Unlike Bill Clinton or John Kennedy, Barack Hussein Obama wouldn't be caught dead visiting one of America's nuclear weapons labs.
Sense the difference in these Dem. Presidents?
But NK has no incentive for launching a first strike anyways. They want to develop nuke tipped missiles to show off and stick it to international community.
February 15, 2013 at 11:41 AM
You are very naive. What NK wants to do with its capability is SELL IT. To the highest bidder, Al Quaida included. The recent test was the most latest episode of a very effective advertising campaign.
You are a moron for implying that there is a profit motive to NK developing nukes. give me a break. They will have to sell alot of them to break even. And AQ would not need to buy all that many anyways. The only "profits" are the returns to successful blackmailing of their enemies, and forcing sanctions to be lifted. The low oxygen levels from the high altitudes sure does have an adverse impact on your analytical abilities.
No real evidence to support a position, so you resort to ad hominum attacks. Yeah, that'll convince everyone you're right.
The 9:28 AM remark applies to BOTH 7:29 PM and to 1:27 AM? 1:27AM just copies the same structure and amplifies it. Disparagement or insult followed by unsupported position. Maybe it is the same person posting both, trying to present as two different people. I've seen more twisted behavior online. Wouldn't surprise me if this was the case.
9:28 AM is selectively labeling some posts, but none of his own, as ad hominem abuse when he can't even spell "ad hominem" correctly.
9:28 AM is selectively labeling some posts, but none of his own, as ad hominem abuse when he can't even spell "ad hominem" correctly.
February 18, 2013 at 1:02 AM
So the misspelling invalidates his point? Pot, meet kettle.
Oh the irony.
Kudos to 1:02 AM for the clever troll post. I will share this with my journalism students as they will appreciate the irony. 1:02 AM not only applies a prototypical ad hominem attack but also uses incorrect spelling of "ad hominem" as an invalidator. On top of that, it addresses and is in response to two previous ad hominem attack posts. Ad hominem attacks on 3 different levels. Very nicely set up. Bravo.
9:28AM is also an ad homimen attack, interestingly enough. The use the same illogic: 'They can't be right.. they just resort to ad hominem attacks.' These are back-to-back ad hominem attacks here. Hilarious.
9:28AM is also an ad homimen attack, interestingly enough. The use the same illogic: 'They can't be right.. they just resort to ad hominem attacks.' These are back-to-back ad hominem attacks here. Hilarious.
What drivel. No wonder NIF failed.
Enough with the nonstop ad hominem linguistic foreplay. Just get a room you two (or three or one.). We get the irony.
This is all a result of Obama and his violations of the US constitution.
Post a Comment