Commander-In-Chief tells America's enemies when he won't use nukes

[SuMar]

This guy is dangerous. There will be more nukes pointed at more people in the world before he gets the hell out.

Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms - NYTimes.com​

 

[KMAN]

He's a f'n idiot.... Thank you Obama voters for risking the lives of our people more than ever... You should be ashamed...

 

[uptownlivin90]

I say we launch them all now and just see what happens. F-ing trolls.

 

[DavidS]

Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms - NYTimes.com

"But the president said in an interview that he was carving out an exception for 'outliers like Iran and North Korea' that have violated or renounced the main treaty to halt nuclear proliferation."

Those threats, Mr. Obama argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options,” a combination of old and new conventional weapons. “I’m going to preserve all the tools that are necessary in order to make sure that the American people are safe and secure,” he said in the interview in the Oval Office.

You neo-cons are more dangerous to the world than the Taliban with a nuke. You people don't even quote the article and I doubt you even read it. You looked at a Drudge headline, specifically written to scare the bejesus out of you, and you react like stupid little lemmings.

When will the conservative movement get some brains behind it?

 

[Avatar4321]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

 

[Xenophon]

Barry is a moron.

To say that the USA would not respond with a nuke to a major chemical or biological attack if the attacker had no nukes is maximum stupidity.

This asshole has no business being commander in chief and the sooner he is voted out of office the better.

 

[hyakku]

Nixon's policy of detente was successful with the Russians and helped establish a tenuous peace between our nations during a turbulent time. Similarly, despite Reagan's initial rhetoric, he eventually pursued a policy of quiet diplomacy with Gorbachev and deemphasized the use of nuclear weapons, as they were detrimental to international relations with the Russians at the time.

Another lesson in history needed I see. According to this logic, Nixon and Reagan both had no idea what they were doing by pursuing policies of cooperation or quiet diplomacy.

 

[Gatekeeper]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

Well if those who wish to see the USA destroyed didn't before, they sure know now and are most likely rethinking their tactics. As for myself any nukes, tactical low yield or otherwise should never be used in a war, and if the enemy escalated the stakes using dirty nukes or chemical warfare, in a response in an ongoing conflict or a surprise attack using them.......well I guess we'll all have to wait and see won't we?

Always BE PREPARED..........why do you think we had items like the MK101 depth charge?

If you don't know what it is, Google it.

This country never used one, but with Iran and NK the stakes may be ratcheting up.

 

[mudwhistle]

This guy is dangerous. There will be more nukes pointed at more people in the world before he gets the hell out.

Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms - NYTimes.com​

I think by now everyone knows that what Obama says and what he does are often polar opposites.

He's dishonest to the core and I don't think any enemy can count on him being anything but a pacifist pansy. But he may experience another rough spell so God help anyone who messes with him when he needs to score political points.

Personally I wish he would go after our enemies like he does Fox News.

 

[mudwhistle]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

Well if those who wish to see the USA destroyed didn't before, they sure know now and are most likely rethinking their tactics. As for myself any nukes, tactical low yield or otherwise should never be used in a war, and if the enemy escalated the stakes using dirty nukes or chemical warfare, in a response in an ongoing conflict or a surprise attack using them.......well I guess we'll all have to wait and see won't we?

Always BE PREPARED..........why do you think we had items like the MK101 depth charge?

If you don't know what it is, Google it.

This country never used one, but with Iran and NK the stakes may be ratcheting up.

This statement only encourages aggression. We don't need to use nukes but saying we won't removes the fear anyone might have had of us using them. Right now would be the best time for Russia to hit us with everything they have.

 

[Gatekeeper]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

Well if those who wish to see the USA destroyed didn't before, they sure know now and are most likely rethinking their tactics. As for myself any nukes, tactical low yield or otherwise should never be used in a war, and if the enemy escalated the stakes using dirty nukes or chemical warfare, in a response in an ongoing conflict or a surprise attack using them.......well I guess we'll all have to wait and see won't we?

Always BE PREPARED..........why do you think we had items like the MK101 depth charge?

If you don't know what it is, Google it.

This country never used one, but with Iran and NK the stakes may be ratcheting up.

This statement only encourages aggression. We don't need to use nukes but saying we won't removes the fear anyone might have had of us using them. Right now would be the best time for Russia to hit us with everything they have.

For those people,the mere existence of America encourages aggression, religious beliefs come to mind first. "They" hate us just for being us. Obama is trying to say, 'Hey we're really nice guys", but the simpleton doesn't get it, 'they' could give a flying crap, their goal is to make America and it's people disappear.
And your right, with Obamas thinking, we are now going to be more vulnerable than ever.

 

[Douger]

The US will never use nukes again.
It's not profitable.
They can just bomb the hell out of someone, send in the glassy eyed nitwits to occupy it, send their cronies in to rebuild everything with your money, while you wave your flags.
Nukes destroy shit completely. Where's the profit in that ?

The main industry in the US is rebuilding shit they blew up.
Why change a perfect plan ?

 

[G.T.]

Wow @ not finding this reasonable. Some of you fucks need your baa-baa's and bwanky's, seriously.

 

[rightwinger]

This guy is dangerous. There will be more nukes pointed at more people in the world before he gets the hell out.

Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms - NYTimes.com​

What would be the point in nuking a country that does not have nukes? We have a military that is 100 times as strong as any of these countries and unrestricted access to bomb by conventional needs. Cold War tactics are obsolete when dealing with non-superpowers.

What do we gain from such a statement?

We remove any incentives to develop nuclear weapons for protection. If they know nukes would only be used if they themselves have nukes it provides a disincentive to develop them

 

[Murf76]

Obama's whole problem with foreign policy is that it lacks any degree of intellect and relies solely upon regurgitated ideology.

You don't telegraph your response to your enemies unless you're doing it as a deterrent. Telling people who want to kill you that your response to an attack will be less rather than more... is simply an encouragement.

He's a moron.

 

[Zander]

Reminds me of when Reagan said, "Mr Gorbachev would you mind tearing down this wall? Seriously, we won't do anything about it if you don't. But.... You guys are really nice and stuff and we don't want to hurt your feelings. Thanks, I hope I wasn't too harsh.".

 

[Murf76]

The US will never use nukes again.
It's not profitable.
They can just bomb the hell out of someone, send in the glassy eyed nitwits to occupy it, send their cronies in to rebuild everything with your money, while you wave your flags.
Nukes destroy shit completely. Where's the profit in that ?

The main industry in the US is rebuilding shit they blew up.
Why change a perfect plan ?

Interesting that war is not a national security issue in your book, but rather a money-making endeavor.

Wouldn't that be communist murderer, Che Guevara, featured in your avatar?

 

[VaYank5150]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

Well if those who wish to see the USA destroyed didn't before, they sure know now and are most likely rethinking their tactics. As for myself any nukes, tactical low yield or otherwise should never be used in a war, and if the enemy escalated the stakes using dirty nukes or chemical warfare, in a response in an ongoing conflict or a surprise attack using them.......well I guess we'll all have to wait and see won't we?

Always BE PREPARED..........why do you think we had items like the MK101 depth charge?

If you don't know what it is, Google it.

This country never used one, but with Iran and NK the stakes may be ratcheting up.

We ARE prepared dumbass. What would be the point of using nucular weapons? I mean, honestly? We have MORE THAN ENOUGH regular bombs to flatten most countries now. What would be the advantage of using nuclear weapons?

 

[Avatar4321]

To be fair, how often have we actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy? Twice.

Does anyone honestly think our enemies are expecting us to ever use them?

Well if those who wish to see the USA destroyed didn't before, they sure know now and are most likely rethinking their tactics. As for myself any nukes, tactical low yield or otherwise should never be used in a war, and if the enemy escalated the stakes using dirty nukes or chemical warfare, in a response in an ongoing conflict or a surprise attack using them.......well I guess we'll all have to wait and see won't we?

Always BE PREPARED..........why do you think we had items like the MK101 depth charge?

If you don't know what it is, Google it.

This country never used one, but with Iran and NK the stakes may be ratcheting up.

The problem with that is that those who would use such weapons are unlikely to be nations and much more likely to be terrorists from various countries and origins. Who the heck are we supposed to nuke? Everyone?

 

[rightwinger]

Reminds me of when Reagan said, "Mr Gorbachev would you mind tearing down this wall? Seriously, we won't do anything about it if you don't. But.... You guys are really nice and stuff and we don't want to hurt your feelings. Thanks, I hope I wasn't too harsh.".

In 1986 at the Reykjavik summit, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, both passionate about nuclear disarmament, shocked deterrence experts with an unimaginable proposal – total nuclear disarmament. “It would be fine with me if we eliminated all nuclear weapons,” said Reagan. “We can do that,” replied Gorbachev, “Let’s eliminate them. We can eliminate them