Obama's Disarm-America Agenda
Story here.
Cutting America’s nuclear arsenal to 300 warheads — a level not seen since 1950 — would place the number of US strategic nuclear weapons at a level comparable with France, heightening fears that it would make America’s strategy of nuclear deterrence obsolete.
Yet, even if President Obama ultimately accepts the 1,100 level of strategic nuclear warheads, it would still represent a significant and serious nuclear cutback given that many American military officials claim that the 1,550 level mandated by New START is the lowest level that can be used to maintain deterrence of a nuclear attack.
Moreover, they argue, such a cutback in nuclear weapons would also serve to undermine the credibility of the nuclear “umbrella” that the United States extends to its allies (such as South Korea and Japan). Absent US nuclear protection, those countries may very well feel compelled to build their own nuclear forces. In fact, Saudi Arabia is already planning to
initiate its own nuclear program if Iran gets a nuclear bomb.
Unfortunately, the decision to neuter America’s nuclear forces comes at the same time the Obama administration is working to heavily diminish America’s conventional forces, a process begun in January when Obama ordered a shift from the nation’s longstanding capability to fight two major conflicts at once.
Hey... why does it seem that the ONLY thing Obama is cutting from is national defence?
Why bother to cut ANYTHING if he's ratcheting up overall spending anyway? It's clear that he aims to bankrupt America ASAP. So his agenda of decimating America's ability to win a potential world war would logically fit with his agenda to bring America to her knees, which he's doing very well, and very quickly...
posted by Canadian Sentinel at 6:14 PM
11 Comments:
"why does it seem that the ONLY thing Obama is cutting from is national defence?"
Because you don't read very much on American policy and program funding?
Obama has cut, or proposed to cut, expenditures in environmental monitoring and regulation, conservation, Arts, product safety regulation, and other areas.
He's also proposing to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 to 28 percent.
I'd like to see details on those alleged cuts, and I'd like proof that they weren't just shifted to something else, ie. the money's still being wasted, perhaps on something else in the related area.
Plus Obama's proposed corporate tax cut is pathetic, considering it'd still be almost twice that of Canada, ie. 28 percent versus 15 percent.
My o my... another Obummer lover, you are, arencha, Blabs? Oh, my...
Oh, and when I asked for details on cuts, of course, I meant the non-defence ones you claim have been made.
Hey, Blabs, why is it that General Electric, whose CEO Immelt is close to the Obama administration, makes billions in profits per annum and pays no tax?
Apparently there's so many loopholes and so many strings being pulledd that the rate is irrelevant- they'll avoid paying taxes anyway...
Well then, it's now time for the Great Blah-Blah to contemplate his "larger" navel while I provide a nifty link and a few pertinent bits of info.
I'll pause whilst he collects his retractor and mirror.....
There.
We'll talk quietly.
First; this link provides general insight with specific details supporting the points C.S. is making in the comments concerning shifting funds.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/president-obamas-2012-budget-builds-on-failures-of-the-past
"FY 2012 Discretionary Spending. Having pushed discretionary spending up rapidly in the prior two years, the President proposes to reduce 2012 discretionary spending by 5 percent, though he does so only by virtue of three simple and obvious budget gimmicks:
Redefining Pell grants as mandatory spending. Stripped of this gimmick, discretionary spending jumps by $14 billion in 2012.[2]
Reclassifying $54 billion of surface transportation spending from discretionary spending to mandatory spending.[3]
Spending the peace dividend. The budget proposal includes spending for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, referred to as “overseas contingency operations,” as discretionary spending and reduces funding for these operations by $38.2 billion in 2012.[4]
Reversing these budget tricks lifts 2012 discretionary spending by $106.2 billion for an overall $31 billion increase in discretionary spending."
Now, as you can see, per usual Sentinel's statements can be considered factual. In the event....
Shhhh! Shhh. He's stirring back there. I hear muttering.
Oooooooo! He's found a tick. Blah-Blah the Great Silverback Liberal has found a tick and is at an impasse as to what to do about it. One hand on the retractor and one on the mirror leaves him helpless to remove it.
All's quiet,... he must be just staring as it grows...let's continue.
Other sites document the growth of the federal budget since Obama took office charting an increase from $2.73 trillion to $3.82 trillion.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/13/guest-post-obama-and-his-democrats-increased-the-federal-budget-by-29-in-just-the-last-four-years/
"That is a $1.09 TRILLION increase – in just the last four years. A 29% increase – in just the last four years."
So even if a 5% reduction was real, which it isn't, that still leaves a whopping 24% increase over four years ago.
The Blah-Blah only reads selected sources. As he does not read my comments, I cannot help him. For example, if he were to use a retractor with a rack and pinion gear and locking thumb screw he could free up a hand to tweeze. This one will just have to bloat and drop of...#@!!! Violence! Violence!
Run away! Save yourself! Ruuuuuuun!
This broadcast has been temporarily interrupted.
Please join us for the next episode of...
"Liberals in the Mist."
"I'd like to see details on those alleged cuts, and I'd like proof that they weren't just shifted to something else, ie. the money's still being wasted, perhaps on something else in the related area."
Oh, for God's sake: you're not going to pull that one, are you? As a "political blogger", are you telling me you can't actually find his budget proposals???
"Hey, Blabs, why is it that General Electric, whose CEO Immelt is close to the Obama administration, makes billions in profits per annum and pays no tax?"
For the same reason that most other extremely large American corporations make billions of dollars in profits and pay no taxes, Sentinel. Because they can hire the very best tax lawyers and lobbyists the country to (a) shape tax legislation to their liking, and (b) delve into every conceivable loophole.
Should that be changed for all American corporations? Absolutely.
"My o my... another Obummer lover, you are, arencha, Blabs? Oh, my."
Not quite. Some of his policy stuff I like: some I don't. I think he's badly misjudged the political climate of the USA, and overestimated the degree to which political compromise is possible, though.
“Liberals in the Mist”
Part 2:
We are now able to observe the Silver-back Liberal we have fondly named Blah-Blah from a safe distance. From here we can see the package we left behind. Blah-Blah is pacing now, unwilling to approach the package. He senses a trap. He can smell the truth and, like all liberals, will avoid it at all costs; but what to do with it?
Here in the dense urban jungle, the natural habitat for the liberal, we can see that they are the masters of their environment. Blah-Blah is pulling a branch from the denial tree. Carefully he approaches the truth. He stops, looks around, and suddenly tosses the branch over the package and runs for the cover of the dense thicket of deception. A magnificent display.
Slowly, Blah-Blah returns to normal activities. The fruit of the NGO tree is quite abundant here and we can see Blah-Blah feasting. It’s been a full day romping in the false assertions and now Blah-Blah, full of NGO fruit, will take a nap. Climbing high up in an elitist tree he beds down on branches of socialism. Lulled by the droning of the progs, the Silver-back Liberal will dream utopian dreams.
Coming up:
Blah-Blah faces another inconvenient truth:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/04/news/companies/exxon_oil_taxes/index.htm
Mmm... the silverback liberal... fascinating creature, indeed...
Masterfully narrated by the silver tongued Infinity...
Interesting how the United States is recognized globally as the World's Policeman, whether this is formal policy or innuendo, but it does seem rather silly, if not down right foolish, for the policeman to to start throwing away his weapons (and doing so whilst declaring it to the bad guys) when law and order are becoming very precarious.
Only Liberals and tree-hugging global warming theorists would cheer on this irrational, moon-battery.
But then again, it is but a part of their confused thinking pattern.
"Masterfully narrated by the silver tongued Infinity..."
Grown ups speak (and think) for themselves, Sentinel. Just a hint: you're beginning to sound like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov-1S8Xxd94
"Interesting how the United States is recognized globally as the World's Policeman..."
Recognized by those whose interests are aligned with the United States, you mean. I'm not sure most of Asia, Africa or South America would go along with that assessment.
"it does seem rather silly, if not down right foolish, for the policeman to to start throwing away his weapons (and doing so whilst declaring it to the bad guys) when law and order are becoming very precarious."
I'd agree if the US declared its intention of achieving complete, unilateral nuclear disarmament. What is seems Obama is doing, however, is asking the military to recommend scenarios for reduction of an extraordinarily expensive asset, while maintaining a strong nuclear arsenal and delivery system. I'm not sure how many nukes you feel it takes to wipe out an enemy.
Full credit to Sir David Attenborough. Channeling him, writing in his voice, makes it all worth while.
Post a Comment
<< Home