Obama's Nuclear Policy: The World Reacts

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
210,217
Reaction score
36,839
Points
2,190
Obama's nuclear policy: The world reacts - The Week

The president's efforts to scale back the world's nuclear arms ambitions continued today as he signed a new nuclear arms deal with the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which Obama called a "milestone for U.S.-Russia relations," will slash both countries' nuclear arsenals by a third, pending approval by the U.S. Senate. American commentators were split over Obama's new, less bellicose nuclear policy — including his pledge not to use nukes against non-nuclear states that have signed the Non-Proliferation Agreement — and worldwide reaction was just as divided. Here's a brief round-up:

IRAN
The U.S. president is a "cowboy," said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, quoted in the Tehran Times, comparing Obama to George W. Bush. "If Obama intends to follow in Bush’s footsteps, the [global] nations’ response will be the same crushing response they gave to Bush," he said, adding that the President was a "novice" whose policies were dictated by "Zionists."
"Ahmadinejad warns Obama not to follow Bush’s path"

CHINA
China applauded Obama's move, reports Yang Yang in Xinhua. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu noted the "new expressions" in this review, and added that it was vital for Obama to "make drastic reductions in its nuclear weapon arsenal in an irreversible way and further lessen the role of nuclear weapons for its national security." China has already pledged to keep its nuclear arsenal "at the lowest level needed for national security."
"China says U.S. nuke weapons reductions important for int'l disarmament"

UNITED KINGDOM
Obama's move doesn't go far enough, says an editorial in The Guardian. The assurance that the U.S. won't attack non-nuclear states with atomic weapons is "hedged with caveats." Obama's Nobel Prize win came in part because of his stated ambition to create a nuclear-free world. "That reflection has been dimmed by the many detailed concessions" to the U.S. military in this review.
"U.S. nuclear review: Poor posture"

RUSSIA
"Obama's new arms control policy is a clear step in the right direction," says Andrei Fedyashin in RIA Novosti. The "courageous new provisions" in his policy review are evidence that the U.S. president has the "guts" to take on Republican opposition over national security. Critics who say it doesn't go far enough should consider that such "nuclear radicalism" would almost certainly doom START in the U.S. Senate. At very least, this move makes the nuclear button "slightly harder to reach."
"The evolution of Barack Obama's nuclear policy"

PAKISTAN
Both Obama's nuclear policy and START are "more cosmetic than anything else," says Shireen M Mazari in The Nation. This deal will leave the U.S. and Russia "way ahead of the rest of the world in terms of nuclear weapons." Not only that, but the U.S. continues to allow India and Israel to develop nuclear technology, thus "undermining the Non-Proliferation Treaty." Does Obama "really regard the rest of the world as downright foolish?"
 
Last edited:

eagleseven

Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
6,517
Reaction score
1,370
Points
48
Location
OH
When was the last time we had a nuclear-free world?

1944?

Does Obama want a "nuclear-free world" so world powers can start slaughtering each other with conventional weapons again?
 

Dr Gregg

Rookie
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
2,901
Reaction score
201
Points
0
As nice as it is to get rid of these things, you only need a few to destroy or severely harm the world
 

CMike

Zionist, proud to be
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
9,219
Reaction score
1,171
Points
190
It's hard to believe that we have such low class commandeering the white house.
 

Dr Gregg

Rookie
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
2,901
Reaction score
201
Points
0
YEah, we get it, in the wingnuts world, class is being violent and killing many people.
 

eagleseven

Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
6,517
Reaction score
1,370
Points
48
Location
OH
YEah, we get it, in the wingnuts world, class is being violent and killing many people.
I'd argue that nuclear weapons have prevented more killing than any other single factor during the 20th century. They are the reason World War II was the last world war.
 

Dr Gregg

Rookie
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
2,901
Reaction score
201
Points
0
YEah, we get it, in the wingnuts world, class is being violent and killing many people.
I'd argue that nuclear weapons have prevented more killing than any other single factor during the 20th century. They are the reason World War II was the last world war.
Good point. And he's not getting rid of them completely, so the deterrent is still there.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
114,342
Reaction score
26,282
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
YEah, we get it, in the wingnuts world, class is being violent and killing many people.
I'd argue that nuclear weapons have prevented more killing than any other single factor during the 20th century. They are the reason World War II was the last world war.
Why are facts always so cruel to Libruls?
 

eagleseven

Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
6,517
Reaction score
1,370
Points
48
Location
OH
YEah, we get it, in the wingnuts world, class is being violent and killing many people.
I'd argue that nuclear weapons have prevented more killing than any other single factor during the 20th century. They are the reason World War II was the last world war.
Good point. And he's not getting rid of them completely, so the deterrent is still there.
As long as we have enough nuclear warheads to blanket any nation that would consider starting a massive conventional war, we're good. Anything beyond that is wastefully excessive.
 

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,601
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon
china's response is humorous, basically says....we can have as many nukes as we want you stupid idiots
 

Godboy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
18,301
Reaction score
4,300
Points
280
Maintaining these nukes is really expensive. As i recall reading, some time ago, nukes are basically kept in 3 ways. Fully ready, partially disassembled and fully disassembled. The vast majority of our nukes are arent ready to be fired at a moments notice. They are mostly kept disassembled in several parts, inculding the removal of the warhead and the nuclear material inside of it.

Daily inspections and maintainance is required to monitor and test them, even when disassembled, and the amount of men required to oversee this is enormously expensive. Believe it or not, the military employs high paid civilians to oversee the most technical parts of their nuclear activities, including the reactors on Naval vessels like carriers and subs.

Reducing the number of these partially assembled nukes seems like a no brainer to me, but im no defense expert. We still have an assload of ready to go ICBMs in the Airforce, and weve got about another 500 shorter ranged nukes on actively deployed Trident subs at any given time, among a few smaller ones on aircraft carriers.

I say keep the actives, but drastically reduce the innactive ones.
 
Last edited:
OP
rightwinger

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
210,217
Reaction score
36,839
Points
2,190
You can hear the laughter from Iran, Russia and China as the Rube in Chief dismantles our defenses
Are you afraid of an invasion Frankie?

Do you have so little faith in the strongest military force in the history of mankind? Are the nasty Iranians coming to get you Frankie?
 
OP
rightwinger

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
210,217
Reaction score
36,839
Points
2,190
I'd argue that nuclear weapons have prevented more killing than any other single factor during the 20th century. They are the reason World War II was the last world war.
Good point. And he's not getting rid of them completely, so the deterrent is still there.
As long as we have enough nuclear warheads to blanket any nation that would consider starting a massive conventional war, we're good. Anything beyond that is wastefully excessive.
Once you eliminate MAD, your need for world extermination diminishes
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
50,337
Reaction score
10,052
Points
0
Good point. And he's not getting rid of them completely, so the deterrent is still there.
As long as we have enough nuclear warheads to blanket any nation that would consider starting a massive conventional war, we're good. Anything beyond that is wastefully excessive.
Once you eliminate MAD, your need for world extermination diminishes
And the opportunity for world domination increases for those inclined towards destroying the first world.

Were you a hippy during the '60s? Were you hanging out with Ayers when he told the other kids to 'go home and kill their parents'?
 

eagleseven

Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
6,517
Reaction score
1,370
Points
48
Location
OH
Are you afraid of an invasion Frankie?

Do you have so little faith in the strongest military force in the history of mankind? Are the nasty Iranians coming to get you Frankie?
I just don't feel like dying in a foreign country because the Archduke of Austria was assassinated.
 

Dutch

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
1,746
Reaction score
422
Points
98
Location
Ohio
Are you afraid of an invasion Frankie?

Do you have so little faith in the strongest military force in the history of mankind? Are the nasty Iranians coming to get you Frankie?
I just don't feel like dying in a foreign country because the Archduke of Austria was assassinated.
I don't feel like dying in Iraq because someones daddy, who was advised by Cheney by the way, did not finish the job.
 

CMike

Zionist, proud to be
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
9,219
Reaction score
1,171
Points
190
I don't feel like reading idiotic posts like the one above but I did so anyway.
 
OP
rightwinger

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
210,217
Reaction score
36,839
Points
2,190
Are you afraid of an invasion Frankie?

Do you have so little faith in the strongest military force in the history of mankind? Are the nasty Iranians coming to get you Frankie?
I just don't feel like dying in a foreign country because the Archduke of Austria was assassinated.
And how does having thousands of nukes stop that??
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top