« | »

Obama’s Fantasy Of A Nuke-Free World

From a heavily blinkered Associated Press:

Obama outlines sweeping goal of nuclear-free world

By Jennifer Loven, AP White House Correspondent

PRAGUE – Declaring it "matters to all people everywhere," President Barack Obama promised on Sunday to lead the world into a nuclear-free future, giving a hawkish edge to a peacenik pursuit even as North Korea upstaged him with the launch of a long-range rocket that theoretically could carry a warhead.

Obama made his pledge before 20,000 flag-waving Czechs outside the gates of picturesque Prague Castle. He chose a nation that peacefully threw off communism and helped topple nuclear power Soviet Union as the backdrop for presenting an ambitious plan to stop the global spread of dangerous weapons.

[H]e said the United States, with one of the world’s largest arsenals and the only nation to have used an atomic bomb, has a "moral responsibility" to start taking steps now.

It is not only a lofty goal. Gary Samore, Obama’s arms control coordinator, said the plan has a strategic aim: to give the U.S. extra leverage in opposing the pursuit of nuclear arms in adversarial countries such as North Korea and Iran. "We are trying to seek the moral high ground," Samore said

North Korea’s launch, in the works for weeks, could not have been better timed to achieve the reclusive communist country’s goal of grabbing attention…

Obama said the North Korean action served only to underscore the need for the actions he outlined.

"Rules must be binding," he said. "Violations must be punished. Words must mean something." …

To combat the risk from countries, and possibly terrorists, with nuclear weapons, Obama said he would:

– "Immediately and aggressively" seek ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, which he may not get. Signed by President Bill Clinton, it was rejected by the Senate in 1999. Overall, 140 nations have ratified the ban. But they include only 35 of the 44 states that possess nuclear technology, and the United States is the most prominent holdout.

Host a summit within the next year on nuclear weapons.

Undertake a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material worldwide within four years.

– Try to strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by providing more resources and authority for international inspections and mandating "real and immediate consequences" for countries that violate the treaty.

Pursue by the end of the year a new treaty with Russia to reduce the two nations’ nuclear arsenals.

– Seek a new international treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons.

Build a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation, including an international fuel bank, so countries can access peaceful power without increasing the risks of proliferation…

As he has throughout the trip, Obama emphasized priorities that closely match Europe’s, such as promising to tackle climate change. But he had requests as well. He asked European nations to accept detainees from the Guantanamo Bay prison, which he has ordered closed, and to bring in Turkey as a member of the European Union to send a positive signal to the Muslim world.

Turkey is the next and final stop on Obama’s European tour.

As always, Mr. Obama (or rather his teleprompter) blames America first:

[H]e said the United States, with one of the world’s largest arsenals and the only nation to have used an atomic bomb, has a "moral responsibility" to start taking steps now.

But here is Mr. Obama’s (and the AP’s) problem. Or, rather, one of them. They are pig ignorant of history:

He chose a nation that peacefully threw off communism and helped topple nuclear power Soviet Union as the backdrop for presenting an ambitious plan to stop the global spread of dangerous weapons

Czechoslovakia would have been crushed like a small, juicy bug if it had not been for the United States – and specifically – its nuclear arsenal.

To pretend otherwise is simply a blatant lie, even for Mr. Obama (and the AP).

The US’s large ‘nuclear arsenal’ should get the credit for Czechoslovakia now being free. And for the freedom of countless other countries.

But we can’t have that. In fact, we must do away with that power for good – for good.

We must make sure we have no more military power than the moral paragons of Russia and China. Or, actually far less, since without our nuclear advantage we lag behind them in real military strength.

And speaking of this administration’s unadulterated ignorance of history:

It is not only a lofty goal. Gary Samore, Obama’s arms control coordinator, said the plan has a strategic aim: to give the U.S. extra leverage in opposing the pursuit of nuclear arms in adversarial countries such as North Korea and Iran. "We are trying to seek the moral high ground," Samore said.

Could Mr. Samore cite one example of how having the ‘moral high ground’ has ever helped any country achieve victory?

With the possible and singular exception of Great Britain versus India and Gandhi.

And North Korea is no Great Britain.

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, April 5th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

38 Responses to “Obama’s Fantasy Of A Nuke-Free World”

  1. Right of the People says:

    The One will just wave his hand it will be done, Kumbya, Kumbya!

    Barry needs to get a grip on reality.

    10-7

  2. Odie44 says:

    Could Mr. Samore cite one example of how having the moral high ground has ever helped any country?

    With the possible and singular exception of Great Britain versus India and Ghandi.

    SG – I would state this was a temporary “help”, considering India is nuclear capable today – primarily due to GB and America’s assistance, which is the thrust of the issue AND the fact India still maintains a barbaric caste system today. The moral high ground – Ghandi’s intent and the actuality seem to be at a distance.

    • asha says:

      Odie, most of the “aid” till the 90’s came from Soviet. Although the world likes to think great about Gandhi, the GB didnt give a fly about him. Gave independence to many countries after WWII as they didnt have enuf resources to control overseas. As for being nuclear, you are pissing in your pants for countries on the other side of the earth, and India has a fanatic country (with significant US “support” now) on its borders, and had already initiated three wars. India hasnt attacked a country in the last 1000 years. Dont think US worries about India. Worst case you are going to scare India by a tough worded letter and slightly smaller aid, like its doing other countries.

      P.S. India has been giving “aid” to poorer counties in the region in the last decade. There is caste system, but as in Affirmative Action, there is lot of quota for lower caste people in India (movies like to blow it up)

  3. DGA says:

    obama could easily solve his dilemma, we have too many nukes, and iran wants nukes. Simple: Just give all your nukes to iran! I know he doesen’t like proconditions though, but there would need to be just one, the nukes are delivered under their own power, launched from a sub somewhere.

  4. proreason says:

    What could go wrong?

  5. JohnMG says:

    Obumble believes we can negotiate from a position of weakness. You can tell from his stern demeanor and frosty rhetoric that he’s been in many a street fight……NOT! Somebody needs to take him out back and kick the lace panties off his chumpy ass.

    Everything I’ve seen or heard of him makes me want to vomit.

    • Odie44 says:

      JohnMG –

      Well said. Ironically, the USA is in a position of strength – yet Bambi CHOOSES to relegate us to a position of weakness through dangerous pandering, rhetoric and pure ignorance.

      It’s like letting someone put their chess pieces back on the board before you say “check mate”

  6. Rusty Shackleford says:

    He’s gonna put them right where they want us.

    ————

    “Turkey is the next and final stop on Obama’s European tour”

    How fitting. A turkey IN Turkey.

  7. Grzegorz says:

    Is Obama gonna sit down and have a nice chat with the North Koreans?

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Only if he promises not to look taller than Kim Jong Il. (Or make fun of how he speaks Engrish)

  8. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “Rules must be binding,” he said. “Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.” …

    —fingers in my ears—

    LA LA LA LA LA I-CAN’T-HEAR-YOU-I-CAN’T-HEAR-YOU LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

    • jobeth says:

      Rusty, My blood spurted from my ears when I heard him say that!

      Except when HE wants to ILLEGALLY fire a private industrial CEO! And what ever else HE wants to do…Then the rules/laws don’t mean a thing!

      Talk about being a hypocrite! Does he even listen to what he says…Oh, I forgot…he thinks WE don’t listen…or can’t figure out he’s about the biggest lier around.

      This is what is called real Chutzpa!

      I think I dislike him more and more every day!

      Time for me to go into my prayer closet…I need Gods help to control my anger! My walls can’t stand anymore of my kicks.

    • proreason says:

      “My blood spurted from my ears when I heard him say that! Talk about being a hypocrite! Does he even listen to what he says”

      A central question is whether he is a megalomaniac of such epic proportions that he believes this own shit, or whether he is simply an evil megalomaniac who does whatever he can get away with it.

      My own opinion is the former……he has been primped and pampered by his puppet masters for so long that he actually believes that the words they put in his mouth become wisdom spoken by a god destined to transform the world into a utopian “fair” society.

    • jobeth says:

      Pro,

      ” A central question is whether he is a megalomaniac of such epic proportions that he believes this own shit, or whether he is simply an evil megalomaniac who does whatever he can get away with it.”

      Frankly I believe its both. I’ve always believed he is just the front man for a huge socialist/commie machine that has had this in the works for many years.

      I really don’t care if some out there label me a conspiracy nut. I think its pretty clear an unknown community organizer with no other experience can pull all this together in 3 short years…from a no body to the “messiah” of the world.

      That being said I also believe this is one very evil man. You would have to be evil to lie, cheat, and steal like he does.

      So I total agree with you…but raise you one. ;-D

  9. Weasel says:

    Don’t worry folks, we don’t need nukes since Obambi’s paid volunteer Unicorn Wrangler Corp will protect us.
    And enemy missiles can not penetrate our rainbow skies and suger plum wishes!

    • jobeth says:

      Thank goodness!

      Does this mean I can chase my butterflies again?

    • Weasel says:

      Only if you treat them as co-equals! Remember, you are their caregiver, not their owner…
      “The One” will not tolerate harassment of any kind, (except that of taxpayers).

      Wow, spouting this PC garbage is pretty easy once you get going…

    • jobeth says:

      Thank you for reminding me. LOL

  10. Mad-Cabbie says:

    “We must make sure we have no more military power than the moral paragons of Russia and China. Or, actually far less, since without our nuclear advantage we lag behind them in military strength.”

    ——-

    We don’t lag behind either Russia or China. If there was a ‘no nuke’ rule in place, we could destroy both of their military forces simultaneously. They have nothing that can compare or defeat our F-22s, for example. The biggest threat they would pose is their subs getting in close and lauching some missiles at our cities. Otherwise, we would crush both of them like bugs.

    • DGA says:

      You’re serious? Biggest mistake is to underestimate your enemy. Really, a ‘no nuke’ rule is the same as a ‘no guns’ rule for the US, only the criminals will have guns, only the rouge nations will have nukes. This is a dangerous and naieve rhetoric to play on. Some of the Chinese and Russian equipment might be old tech, but they, for the most part, can outnumber what the US has easily.

    • proreason says:

      “The biggest threat they would pose is their subs getting in close and lauching some missiles at our cities.”

      there ya go.

      Who cares about a handful of cities getting obliterated anyway.

      Much better to “redistibute” arms and be more “fair” about US military power.

      Because peace-loving muslims, Russians, N. Koreans, and Venezuala will alway feel oppressed until they have parity in their ability to blow us up.

      Maybe we should pay them reparations as well.

    • DGA says:

      Really PR, this is the same socialst rhetoric as the attempt to socialise the US economy, and just as destructive, to ‘socialise’ the world’s nukes. obama is as much an enemy of the US as any other dictator or despot, and wants the exact same end game; to weaken the US. He’s a fool, we’re in deep do do.

    • jobeth says:

      Pro…

      “Maybe we should pay them reparations as well.”

      Shhhhhhh…..be varrry varrrry quiet…Barney may hear you and add that to the budget…..

    • proreason says:

      “this is the same socialst rhetoric as the attempt to socialise the US economy”

      I’m seeing that as well, DG.

      There’s a symmetry in The Moron’s foreign and domestic policies.

      – The US is to blame for everything that is wrong in the country and the world
      – non-whites races are oppressed but righteous, and should be given their rightful position of leadership and wealth
      – The US should not use might to enforce our laws, and must, in fact, dismantle the strength, because the laws of the US are unjust and must be made subservient to higher laws
      – there should be no power other than a central government and Obamy must decide who rules

    • DGA says:

      Another example going on right now, obama wants to limit tourism to Alaska, loss to the Alaskan tourism economy, and also end the travel ban to Cuba, gain for Cuba’s economy. Somebody tell me this guy isn’t an enemy of the US please.

  11. MinnesotaRush says:

    “President Barack Obama promised on Sunday …”

    There’s the first problem .. o-blah-blah promises. Yeah .. righhhhht!

    “Rules must be binding,” he said. “Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.” …”

    Like Federal Election Rules? Like laws prohibiting foreign donations? Like all the violations your administration and congress is guilty of? Words like your phony campaign promises and routine political pandering? Yeah .. righhht!

    “We are trying to seek the moral high ground,” Samore said.””

    For o-blah-blah and company, THIS is an impossibility (moral hi ground)!

  12. MinnesotaRush says:

    o-blah-blah may have just had another (shall we say) ‘Freudian slip’!?!

    About a minute into this Prague dog and pony show, he mentions that now is the time to build a “global regime”. Serious! Watch and listen!

    http://news.aol.com/main/obama-presidency/article/obama-nuclear-weapons/412784

    What say you to that?!?!

  13. pagar says:

    Biggest mistake is to underestimate your enemy.

    First, one has to find out who the enemy is. I’m pretty sure they think the enemy is not who you and I think it is.

  14. Colonel1961 says:

    Blame it on TOTUS…

  15. canary says:

    I wish the idiot would see it isn’t much different than the gun control issue. The more you take the good guys’ guns away. The more the bad guy’s will use guns.
    Inspite of Obama and Hilary’s warning dire consequences, if N. Korea launched, N. Korea said they were. N. Korea’s words had meaning. It is Obama and Hillary’s cheap warnings that had no meaning.
    What if N Korea’s missle had landed in Alaska? I guess we’d take the moral high ground, and wait for the next round.
    Obama knows he’s an untrustworthy, fake, untruthful windbag, so why can’t he comprehend N. Korea.

  16. pdsand says:

    “It is not only a lofty goal. Gary Samore, Obama’s arms control coordinator, said the plan has a strategic aim: to give the U.S. extra leverage in opposing the pursuit of nuclear arms in adversarial countries such as North Korea and Iran. “We are trying to seek the moral high ground,” Samore said…

    North Korea’s launch, in the works for weeks, could not have been better timed to achieve the reclusive communist country’s goal of grabbing attention…”

    Any objective journalist would have worded this a little differently in a serious reporting of the situation. They would have said something like, North Korea’s refusing to listen to world-wide condemnation of its missile launch, underscored the fact that any foolish attempts to peacefully negotiate the communist bastards away from nuclear weapons will be in vain.

  17. RightWinger says:

    A few years ago I read a book series called “Left Behind”. It was basically the story of the rise of the Anti-Christ and the people left behind after the Rapture who opposed him.

    Now I am not saying Lil Barry is the Anti-Christ, but if it had been written today, the rise of Lil Barry would almost mirror the the AC. The AC in the books started off as some unknown politician who rose out of no where to leader of Romania. From there to the Sec. Gen of the UN who then eventually ushers in the one world order which he becomes ruler of. He had ordered all of the countries of the world to destroy their weapons, sans 10% which was to be left under the direct control of the UN (which later became the Global Community or something like that).

    Unknown thug from Chicago quickly becomes President, currently doing everything he can to destroy the greatest country in the world, now running around the world to adoring crowds, promising to fix everything and disarm everybody and talking about a global regime.

    When Lil Barry gets around to ordering everybody to be lojacked with a chip, then we’ll know for sure.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »