http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/09/next-obama-speech-the-pentagon.php Comments and analyses of important national and international security issues Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:37:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/09/next-obama-speech-the-pentagon.php/comment-page-1#comment-8268 ioelrich Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:33:59 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=1703#comment-8268 I posted the above comment because it repeats a common canard: that Obama is calling for unilateral disarmament. His statements have always made clear that the US will have nuclear weapons as long as any other nation does. In this I disagree with him. For example, if N. Korea has one bomb, does that mean the US needs nuclear weapons even though it has overwhelming conventional superiority, making nuclear weapons redundant? I believe not. But President Obama has made clear repeatedly that even in this case he does not support elimination of US nuclear weapons. I posted the above comment because it repeats a common canard: that Obama is calling for unilateral disarmament. His statements have always made clear that the US will have nuclear weapons as long as any other nation does. In this I disagree with him. For example, if N. Korea has one bomb, does that mean the US needs nuclear weapons even though it has overwhelming conventional superiority, making nuclear weapons redundant? I believe not. But President Obama has made clear repeatedly that even in this case he does not support elimination of US nuclear weapons.

]]> http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/09/next-obama-speech-the-pentagon.php/comment-page-1#comment-8189 Sean Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:12:16 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=1703#comment-8189 How low should we go when CHINA and RUSSIA are modernizing and improving their strategic and theater missiles? U.S. strategic platforms have been dramatically cut in the past 20 years (ICBM down to 450 from 1,050, active warheads reduced on ICBMs/ SLBMs, B1 bombers fitted and reassigned conventional roles, four Trident subs converted to SSGNs. Where is China's and Russia's leadership as world powers in reducing their arsenals? Seems convienent how everyone, including FAS, gives these two a pass. How low should we go when CHINA and RUSSIA are modernizing and improving their strategic and theater missiles? U.S. strategic platforms have been dramatically cut in the past 20 years (ICBM down to 450 from 1,050, active warheads reduced on ICBMs/ SLBMs, B1 bombers fitted and reassigned conventional roles, four Trident subs converted to SSGNs. Where is China’s and Russia’s leadership as world powers in reducing their arsenals? Seems convienent how everyone, including FAS, gives these two a pass.

]]>