Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    We knew along that Obama was weak and that he was going to be unable to fulfill his obligations as Commander in Chief.  Yesterday he said he would never use nuclear weapons against a nation that didn't have nuclear weapons.

    Barack....if a guy with a big knife broke into your house where your babies and wife were sleeping soundly and you had a shotgun, would you put it down and go find your Ginsu??

    It's one thing to be unable to defend our country it's another thing to actually tell the entire world that you wouldn't do anything necessary to defend us.

    Just as I said many times, unqualified to the job and the weakest President ever. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    So you think it's OK to use nuclear weapons against a country that doesn't nuclear weapons.  So much for our nuclear aresenal being a deterrant against nuclear attack.

    Let's tell all of the other countries in the world that they can't have nuclear weapons because they aren't responsible enough to use them even though we can use our nuclear weapons anytime we want.

    Let's tell Iran that they have to give their nuclear ambitions simply because we said so.  And even if they do give them up, we are going to retain the right to drop a couple of nukes on Tehran because they are providing weapons to a group of people we don't like.

    And you realize what you're talking about?  You're talking about mass murder on an epic scale.  You're talking about killing hundreds of thousands of people, the vast majority of which are women, children, and old men.

    Keep up the tough talk.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    "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."



    But wait. We've been told on here by many on the Left that Iran and N. Korea aren't a threat. That those who say they are a threat are just scared and fear-mongering. Well, if they aren't a threat then why the exception by Obama? Why the need to carve out an exception if they aren't a threat? There should be no need for ANY exception. I guess Obama is scared and fear-mongering eh?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsATravesty. Show ItsATravesty's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    I assumed that Obama was not stupid... until now. I assumed his radical policy changes were intentional. I assumed he was not some idealistic socialist idiot... until now.

    To broadcast to the world what the United Stated would and wouldn't do in prescribed nuclear scenarios transcends foolish.
    To walk away from a 'peace through strength' approach is suicide.
    To ignore recommendations from the defense secretary and the joint chiefs of staff is nothing short of reprehensible.
    To isolate and condemn our closest allies for the last 70 years is the decision of an imbicile.

    Does this fool think the world including our sworn enemies will follow our lead, or will they see the weak points and attack? He is making us a target.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    We knew along that Obama was weak and that he was going to be unable to fulfill his obligations as Commander in Chief.  Yesterday he said he would never use nuclear weapons against a nation that didn't have nuclear weapons. Barack....if a guy with a big knife broke into your house where your babies and wife were sleeping soundly and you had a shotgun, would you put it down and go find your Ginsu?? It's one thing to be unable to defend our country it's another thing to actually tell the entire world that you wouldn't do anything necessary to defend us. Just as I said many times, unqualified to the job and the weakest President ever. 
    Posted by macnh1
    GOOD POST....WHY SHOULD THE "BIG O" DEFEND HIMSELF WHEN WE "PROVIDE THE BLANKET THAT HE SLEEPS UNDER" !!! YOUR 110% RIGHT ON THE ABOVE.....WHEN WILL AMERICA WAKE UP TO THE "TRANSFORMING OF AMERICA TO A 3RD WORLD COUNTRY" ?????  WATCH GLENN BECK AT 5:00pm.....HE HAS IT DOWN PAT  !!!!!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from schadenfreude99. Show schadenfreude99's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    And god forbid we build more nuclear energy plants, so we don't have coal miners blowing themselves up and leaving helpless families behind.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    You never tell your potential enemies what your game plan may or not include.  NEVER let them know what you aren't willing to do. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    So you think it's OK to use nuclear weapons against a country that doesn't nuclear weapons.  So much for our nuclear aresenal being a deterrant against nuclear attack. Let's tell all of the other countries in the world that they can't have nuclear weapons because they aren't responsible enough to use them even though we can use our nuclear weapons anytime we want. Let's tell Iran that they have to give their nuclear ambitions simply because we said so.  And even if they do give them up, we are going to retain the right to drop a couple of nukes on Tehran because they are providing weapons to a group of people we don't like. And you realize what you're talking about?  You're talking about mass murder on an epic scale.  You're talking about killing hundreds of thousands of people, the vast majority of which are women, children, and old men. Keep up the tough talk.
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover


    I'm not saying we should use nuclear weapons....they are devestating.

    Why do we tell the world what we are willing to do or not do???

    It's wreckless and naive.  Even Carter knew better. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from easydoesit2. Show easydoesit2's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    Please don't fret. This "policy"  is merely rhetoric, has no force of law, and can be reversed in a new york minute.  It certainly isn't enough to make the rest of the world forget that the United States is the one and only nation to ever use nuclear weapons in warfare, and at a point where the US victory in the war was assured.  We did it to save American lives and to hasten the war's end by unleashing the fires of hell against our enemy.  I don't feel that that was a bad thing, either. I'm just sayin'.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    What country is the only one that has used nuclear weapons? The USA.
    Who has more nukes than anyone and more than one would need to destry the planet? The USA
    What country is making other people live in fear of total anihilation? The USA
    What country is so arrogant that it thinks it can tell other countries whether or not they can have nukes? The USA
    Would other countries need or want nukes if the US didn't have them? No

    Solution - the US disarms unilaterally and distributes nukes to other countries that don't have them. Then the other countries won't feel threatened that we have them and they will feel safer because they do. Then no one will attack us ever.

    Problem solved by Barack Obama!!!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    We knew along that Obama was weak and that he was going to be unable to fulfill his obligations as Commander in Chief.  Yesterday he said he would never use nuclear weapons against a nation that didn't have nuclear weapons. Barack....if a guy with a big knife broke into your house where your babies and wife were sleeping soundly and you had a shotgun, would you put it down and go find your Ginsu?? It's one thing to be unable to defend our country it's another thing to actually tell the entire world that you wouldn't do anything necessary to defend us. Just as I said many times, unqualified to the job and the weakest President ever. 
    Posted by macnh1


    In this thread, there are a bunch of Republicans screaming that "Obama is weak."  Tell me exactly what scenario you are afraid of.  Don't make stupid useless talking point statements like "you don't tell your enemy what you aren't willing to do" -- explain what enemy and what scenario you are afraid of (else you prove yourself not worth listening to).

    Are you worried that Canada is going to send tanks across the border? 

    If so, do you believe the appropriate response would be to instantly vaporize millions of people in Canadian cities?

    No?  Then why does it matter if we announce we won't nuke them in response to a non-nuclear attack?

    [Editing addition:  The point has also been correctly made that this declaration has NO force whatsoever.  It doesn't bind us to do or not do anything.  I'm sure that won't stop people from imagining that we'd sit on our hands and do nothing in the worst circumstances, if they're set on believing that]

    <Recap: Reason 1 it's more stupid fear mongering is that we are not going to be invaded by another country.  Nukes are not what has held other countries from invading us. />

    Let's review:

    "the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack. " BUT "the new strategy would include the option of reconsidering the use of nuclear retaliation against a biological attack, if the development of such weapons reached a level that made the United States vulnerable to a devastating strike."  AND "Mr. Obama rejected the formulation sought by arms control advocates to declare that the “sole role” of nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack. "

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html?hp


    Let's cut the B.S.   The only people who might attack us with a chem/bio attack are terrorists. 

    If you think the announcement shows "weakness" it means that you think we should have instantly vaporized millions of human begins in major Afghan cities in retaliation for 9/11.  And it means you think that should be our response if terrorists ever attack us again.

    If that's not what you think, then please, by all tell me WHICH NON-NUCLEAR COUNTRY DO YOU THINK WILL INVADE THE UNITED STATES? 




    [Prediction - responses will be random rants about socialism and weakness, and other Republican short cuts past adult thought]
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    In Response to Obama NO nukes when defending America!!! : So if Canada invades us with a conventional army, you want our response to be to vaporize their major cities?
    Posted by WhatIsItNow


    I believe what he's saying is that we should at least appear to be a threat to use nukes. I don't believe he's saying we should especially in the scenario you provided. I believe the posters' thought is sometimes just appearing to be a threat can prevent escalation. Basically not tipping your hand.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
      Obama is the laughing stock of the world and so are we for our foolishness to elect someone on the basis of his skin color.
    Posted by Newtster


    Now you're claiming that democrats voted for Obama because he was black? 

    I think you just showed your true colors :)
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    Who said that the nukes were here just as a deterrent to nuclear attack?
    Posted by Newtster


    Read much?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    I wonder why the biggest kid in the class is never the one bullied.....

    If the biggest kid in the class announced that he would NEVER fight back...do you think he is now at greater risk to be picked on???

    Why do liberals think they can defy human nature???
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    If the biggest kid in the class announced that he would NEVER fight back...do you think he is now at greater risk to be picked on???
    Posted by macnh1


    NO!


    Because he might get pissed off and change his mind.

    This thought experiment supports my argument.  We're the biggest kid in the class. 

    Point me to a smaller kid who's going to pick on us now that we promised not to break their nose.

    Point me to a non-nuclear country, that we believe complies with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, that you think is more likely to attack us with their army, because we have issued a non-binding show proclamation that we won't nuke them.

    This isn't a minor point. There is no such country.   Except maybe nutjob countries exempted from our meaningless proclamation (NK and Iran).
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SuperExec. Show SuperExec's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    "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." But wait. We've been told on here by many on the Left that Iran and N. Korea aren't a threat. That those who say they are a threat are just scared and fear-mongering. Well, if they aren't a threat then why the exception by Obama? Why the need to carve out an exception if they aren't a threat? There should be no need for ANY exception. I guess Obama is scared and fear-mongering eh?
    Posted by hawkeye01

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SuperExec. Show SuperExec's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    Wrong... It was Bush who did nothing when N Korea threatened us and also did and said nothing to Iran.    Obama already spoke his mind to both of them.   Wake up and listen to the correct news commentators.

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    "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." But wait. We've been told on here by many on the Left that Iran and N. Korea aren't a threat. That those who say they are a threat are just scared and fear-mongering. Well, if they aren't a threat then why the exception by Obama? Why the need to carve out an exception if they aren't a threat? There should be no need for ANY exception. I guess Obama is scared and fear-mongering eh?
    Posted by hawkeye01

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    "Are you worried that Canada is going to send tanks across the border? "

    Talk about snarky...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SuperExec. Show SuperExec's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    Pres. Obama already took care of the problem with North Korea and Iran.. If you remember he was standing with England & France.   It was Bush that did nothing.   Wimp.
    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    So you think it's OK to use nuclear weapons against a country that doesn't nuclear weapons.  So much for our nuclear aresenal being a deterrant against nuclear attack. Let's tell all of the other countries in the world that they can't have nuclear weapons because they aren't responsible enough to use them even though we can use our nuclear weapons anytime we want. Let's tell Iran that they have to give their nuclear ambitions simply because we said so.  And even if they do give them up, we are going to retain the right to drop a couple of nukes on Tehran because they are providing weapons to a group of people we don't like. And you realize what you're talking about?  You're talking about mass murder on an epic scale.  You're talking about killing hundreds of thousands of people, the vast majority of which are women, children, and old men. Keep up the tough talk.
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsATravesty. Show ItsATravesty's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    "Are you worried that Canada is going to send tanks across the border? " Talk about snarky...
    Posted by hawkeye01


    Tanks !! OMG !!
    uhh Mexico didn't need any tanks when they invaded with an occupational army of 15+ MILLION.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    Wrong... It was Bush who did nothing when N Korea threatened us and also did and said nothing to Iran.    Obama already spoke his mind to both of them.   Wake up and listen to the correct news commentators.

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    "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." But wait. We've been told on here by many on the Left that Iran and N. Korea aren't a threat. That those who say they are a threat are just scared and fear-mongering. Well, if they aren't a threat then why the exception by Obama? Why the need to carve out an exception if they aren't a threat? There should be no need for ANY exception. I guess Obama is scared and fear-mongering eh?
    Posted by hawkeye01


    Are you drunk? What the fcuk are you talking about? What exactly is it you THINK I said when I supplied the quote from Obama?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    Pres. Obama already took care of the problem with North Korea and Iran.. If you remember he was standing with England & France.   It was Bush that did nothing.   Wimp. In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!! :
    Posted by SuperExec


    Took care of the problem? Really? If the problem has been taken care of then why the need to carve out an exception for Iran and N. Korea as stated by OBAMA:

    "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."

    Seems odd to make an exception for these two countries if the problem has already been taken care of. Don't ya think? Or is that the problem? In that you don't think.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!

    In Response to Re: Obama NO nukes when defending America!!!:
    I wonder why the biggest kid in the class is never the one bullied..... If the biggest kid in the class announced that he would NEVER fight back...do you think he is now at greater risk to be picked on??? Why do liberals think they can defy human nature???
    Posted by macnh1


    NO!

    Because he might get pissed off and change his mind.

    This thought experiment supports my argument.  We're the biggest kid in the class. 

    Point me to a smaller kid who's going to pick on us now that we promised not to break their nose.

    Point me to a non-nuclear country, that we believe complies with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, that you think is more likely to attack us with their army, because we have issued a non-binding show proclamation that we won't nuke them.

    This isn't a minor point. There is no such country .   Except maybe nutjob countries exempted from our meaningless proclamation (NK and Iran).


    --  (hence the "snarky" comment that offended Hawkeye ... does anyone really think we really need to worry about Canada invading us?) --
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share