From the film ” Seven Days in May”
“I think the signing of a nuclear disarmament pact with the Soviet Union is at best an act of naivete, and at worst an unsupportable negligence. We’ve stayed alive because we’ve built up an arsenal, and we’ve kept the peace because we’ve dealt with an enemy who knew we would use that arsenal. And now we’re asked to believe that a piece of paper will take the place of missile sites and Polaris submarines, and that an enemy who hasn’t honored one solemn treaty in the history of its existence will now, for our convenience, do precisely that. I have strong doubts, gentlemen……..”
Another quote from the film not in this video that pertain to the article below:
General James Mattoon Scott: And if you want to talk about your oath of office, I’m here to tell you face to face, President Lyman, that you violated that oath when you stripped this country of its muscles – when you deliberately played upon the fear and fatigue of the people and told them they could remove that fear by the stroke of a pen. And then when this nation rejected you, lost faith in you, and began militantly to oppose you, you violated that oath by not resigning from office and turning the country over to someone who could represent the people of the United States.
Concerns on Proposed Reduction of U.S. Nuclear Stockpile to 1,000 Weapons
The Heritage Foundation
According to press reports, President Obama has directed the U.S. to seek a future strategic arms control treaty with Russia that will reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpile to 1,000 weapons, an 80 percent reduction.
This leads to the question of how President Obama chose this number of 1,000. Unfortunately, circumstances make it clear that President Obama and his Administration have chosen this number arbitrarily.
When the U.S. undertakes an effort as sensitive and fundamental to its security as negotiating a strategic nuclear arms control treaty, it should do so on the basis of careful planning:
First, the President and his Administration must settle on a clear strategy and define the means by which the treaty will bolster that strategy;
Second, this strategy must identify the military and political requirements the U.S. nuclear force must fulfill over the expected life of the treaty; and
Third, such a strategy must establish a clear means of verifying compliance with the expected treaty and have specific plans for enforcing the terms of the treaty during its implementation.
These are the fundamental standards for effective arms control.
A Clear Lack of Planning
When the press reports announcing the pending arms control treaty were published, President Obama had been office precisely 17 days. It is utterly implausible that he and his Administration have taken any of the planning steps necessary to implement such an ambitious strategic nuclear arms control treaty. Obama’s national security strategy, at a minimum, is months away from completion.
More importantly, there is no indication that the President has established the criteria for assuring the political and military utility of the U.S. nuclear stockpile and active arsenal that would remain in place following the ratification and execution of the planned treaty. Politically, it must be determined, among other things:
* How the remaining nuclear arsenal will increase stability and lessen the likelihood of strategic strikes against the U.S. and its allies,
* Whether the force will be based primarily on deterring strategic attacks by countering them or by relying on retaliatory strikes; and
* How to extend the U.S. nuclear umbrella for the protection of its allies.
The Obama Administration has made no public assertion that any of these planning steps have been taken. What makes this lack of planning particularly disturbing is that there has been a torrent of recent reports that the state of the U.S. nuclear weapons infrastructure is in decline.
The Need for Caution
If President Obama’s stated commitment to maintain a strong deterrent until global denuclearization is something more than subterfuge, then he should state that reports asserting that he has directed the U.S. to engage in negotiations with Russia to reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpile to 1,000 weapons are inaccurate.
Such a statement should also make it clear that any such negotiations will be undertaken in substantive terms only after Obama’s Administration has concluded a careful planning process. It is a gross understatement to say that a policy based on the assumption that nuclear weapons have no value–and that nuclear arms control is therefore a low stakes game–is fraught with danger. President Obama needs to be more careful and deliberate.
Wild Thing’s comment……….
IMO the United States needs to maintain a nuclear stockpile sufficient to utterly destroy any country that might attack us. And Russsia will play Obama like a fiddle. Putin will give up 80% of his nukes when Hell freezes over.
Obama thinking the Russians will abide by any agreement to reduce nuclear stockpiles. Fat chance!
My worry is that this could be part of an Obama / Ayers Doctrine to weaken the United States defense capability.
I remember reading an account years ago about Jimmy Carter very first meeting with his national security team. He expressed an interest in reducing nuclear arms, and the team dutifully laid out the current state of negotiations with the Soviets, their capabilities, etc.
The newly-elected Carter stunned the military men into utter silence when he said his goal was to reduce nearly all of America’s nuclear weaponry. As I recall, the writer put it something like this: “Everyone in the room gasped inaudibly….”
From “45 Communist Goals”:
Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963:
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
‘Goals’ 4-45 can be found here ….Communist Goals
….Thank you Mark for sending this to me.
Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67
…. Thank you John for sending this to me.
Recent Comments