Obama: No to nuclear response to attacks on the US.

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Obama: No to nuclear response to attacks on the US.
Brad Piff 4/6/2010 12:35:49 AM

Barack Obama is set to announce a new defence strategy that would reduce the circumstances in which the US would be prepared to use nuclear weapons. It would rule out a nuclear response to attacks on the US involving biological, chemical or conventional weapons. Nor would the US use nuclear arms on non-nuclear states that comply with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Mr Obama said he would make exceptions for states deemed in violation of the treaty, naming Iran and North Korea. Ahead of the report's release, Mr Obama told the New York Times he was convinced Iran was on a course that "would provide them with nuclear weapons capabilities". Last week, Mr Obama said he wanted to see new UN sanctions on Tehran "within weeks". Tehran insists its nuclear programme is peaceful, but its refusal to adhere to international demands has raised fears of a possible strike on its nuclear facilities by the US or Israel. Reduction pact The New York Times said Mr Obama described his new policy as "part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions". More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8604217.stm

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

buzzard 4/7/2010 5:00:06 PM

'Good guy' -points. Every democratic nation that is dependant on trade needs good guy -points. A country that has exhausted its arsenal of threats and extended it's goodwill to the red zone even with the closest allies is virtually without power - no matter how well armed.

If you hurt foreign relations and your trade takes huge blows, there goes the economy. You have to be a good guy to prosper.

United States - adding limitations in directions where nukes aren't actively needed in the first place - gained leverage and deterrent against those that are a real threat. Lack of Good guy -points is the bottleneck of using WMD's against rogue nations.

Not that I exactly see them as role models, but Soviet Era Russia or the present Chinese government don't give a rat's behind about 'good guy points' and everyone in the world still kowtows to them.

I believe your theory is false. Sucking up to people that don't like you by appearing to be weak doesn't get you brownie points anywhere but in Nobel voting.

Quote Reply

Panther 4/7/2010 7:31:55 PM

The problem here is that the Iranian mullahs want nukes and to be nuked, though the Iranian people are not inclined in such a way. This makes no difference now anyways. Obama already laid our cards on the table, leaving the Iranian mullahs assured that the west won't impede their acquiring of Nuclear weapons. Everyone is praying for a peaceful solution to this crisis when they should be preparing for a catastrophic WMD war

Quote Reply

Panther 4/7/2010 7:37:00 PM

h**p://www.michaeltotten.com/2010/04/our-man-inside-irans-revolutionary-guards.php

I strongly urge anyone to read this article and not curse the day that the warnings from the eighties have largely been ignored and forgotten. We know what is coming, we just refuse too see it or even admit that it is likely too happen in our life times!

Quote Reply

YelliChink 4/7/2010 10:59:24 PM

Truly democratic countries can't be non-free. If a democratic country is socialist, then the people in it are just inclined that way - free to choose the system to their liking.

Democracy and socialism can marry each other for a while. Under that circumstances, it's one sheep and two wolves in sheep clothes voting what to have for dinner.

Allow me to elaborate:

One wolf is the ruling class who literally owns everything in the country.

The other wolf is underclass who pays no tax and survive on government handouts.

The sheep is YOU, the middle class, who work like a mule and pay hefty tax, fees, fines, tuition and tolls, and have to fix everything in the country.

Funny thing is that once you got eaten, the wolves will start to fight each other.

Quote Reply

Mikko @buzz 4/8/2010 4:57:20 AM

Not that I exactly see them as role models, but Soviet Era Russia or the present Chinese government don't give a rat's behind about 'good guy points' and everyone in the world still kowtows to them.

Yes, I am afraid of what becomes of China, and I am afraid of what becomes of Russia.

But would I trade places with an average Chinaman or Russian, would I want to live in that system? No. But I definetly wouldn't object doing a two-year tour in Silicon Valley.

Foreign policy of a nation aims to support the goals and lifes of its own people. Being feared or being loved abroad is only a tool, not a goal in itself. Your life is in no way altered whether some people wet their pants in front of your might. Your goal is to be left in peace and be free to set your own goals and pursue them in a way you choose.

Global relations, military issues, wealth of nations and ultimately goals of individuals are seamed together in far more complex ways than to value "being feared" or "being obeyed" too high. And you know it and I don't mean to insult your intellect in any way. It's just that - as you said your self - Chinese and Soviet Russians are not an example to follow. As for modern Russians, being feared is pretty much all they have and that's not much.

Quote Reply

YelliChink 4/8/2010 10:20:27 AM

Yes, I am afraid of what becomes of China, and I am afraid of what becomes of Russia.

But would I trade places with an average Chinaman or Russian, would I want to live in that system? No. But I definetly wouldn't object doing a two-year tour in Silicon Valley.

Either you need to read a lot and actually talk to people, or you just try too hard to stick with Finnish image of being extraordinarily weird.

Quote Reply

Mikko 4/8/2010 10:58:03 AM

Either you need to read a lot and actually talk to people, or you just try too hard to stick with Finnish image of being extraordinarily weird.

Me weird?! You're the weirdest poster around yourself, easily. Are there two posters with the same name or something; in strictly military threads you stick to coherent arguments, but discussing diplomacy and ideologies with you is like watching a Tim Burton movie .

Quote Reply

YelliChink 4/8/2010 12:38:13 PM

Yes, you weird.

You pretend to be naive on many issues while you are actually not. Take, for example, your very word that foreign policy to either be feared or loved, which is simplified to completely nonsense. There are only two possibilities that you keep posting naive remarks like that. One is that you are a naivette, which is very unlikely. The other is that you pretend to be so in order to get moral high ground, which is typical leftist tricks.

Beautiful words you have but substance there is not in your content. Solution there is surely none. Your insistence on posting in this fashion amazed me and you don't seem to learn few things about the reality. I debate in a fashion which I reflect opponents character and knowledge. If you think I am posting things right out of Alice and the Wonderland, then you know where your remarks are from.

I don't watch movies anymore for years. If you stop watching garbage from Hollywood and start reading classics and talk to real people, you may get somewhere.

Quote Reply

smitty237 Yellichink and Mikko 4/8/2010 6:19:18 PM

Knock it off, you two. You are both intelligent, conscientious posters that often have interesting things to add. Let's lay off the name calling and vitriol and stay on topic please.

Quote Reply

afrikan_neekeri 4/12/2010 5:20:00 PM

If you hurt foreign relations and your trade takes huge blows, there goes the economy. You have to be a good guy to prosper.

First of all, most countries on this planet aren't democratic, and most democratic countries are socialist, not free. In the end, trades are regulated not by military power, but by the power of market. He who hath the biggest market layth the rules of trade.

And the red part only applies to small countries such as Finland. Americans don't need Nokia, but Finland needs the US to open its market to Nokia.

Nuclear arsenal is necessary as deterent against Communist China and a possible Fascist regime in Russia. It is also necessary to maintain rights for first strike against foreign hostility with nukes, especially after a severe biological attack that dramatically depopulates and cripples the country. Russia, India and China all have similar doctrine. There is no telling how long the US can maintain edge on military tech and conventional arms when the economy keeps going down, and we all know how reliable US allies really are.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 NEXT