3 votes

This may be a perfect move for the Campaign to take control of his Foriegn Policy problem!

Obama seeks to cut U.S. Nuclear Arsenal by 80%??

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NUCLEAR_WEAPONS?SI...

If The Paul campaign was the first to make a stand against Obama weakening our national defense in this manner wouldnt it show that his policies warrrant another look from Republican naysayers?

With the current status of our relations with Russia and China threatening over U.S participation in the middle east should we really be making this move now?

I think it could be a move by the Campaign to show streangth in their Foreign Policy. Many Republicans dont like RP foreign policy. This is a non aggressive way to make a stand on National Defense that would show strength.

Just a thought........




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

2nd more general point

on what he can do re the "FP problem" I pointed out a few things in this post which would play well with 'the base' without turning his overall view upside down.

gedankenexperiment.dk views on finance, politics and science

Several options on the table

but I do not think it is realistic that any president will be able to cut below 1,200. There is a point not much below that which would put both the US and Russia at risk of a third country (right now China) being able break out to a competitive position vis. a vis the two current superpowers.

Lets be honest here - at this point in time the number of nukes the US or Russia have are not a big issue. Relations are stable and the figure is a fraction of the 10s of thousands from the cold war peak. Nukes will never be eliminated (pandoras box) to the goal should be a level which creates the most stability. THat level is not 0 and almost certainly not 300.

While generally on the doveish side of things, I highly recommend armscontrolwonk.com for informed writing on this subject.

gedankenexperiment.dk views on finance, politics and science

Your "cut US Nuclear Arsenal by 80%" comment misleading.

That is VERY DIFFERENT than...

"The Associated Press report that the administration is weighing a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons."

Further, you got me very happy and excited with your misleading statement, --- too bad its not true.

I may be a minority of just one, but I strongly believe we can abolish nearly all of the US Military from around the world. Gone are all our weapons, nukes, air planes, navy boats and navy subs from overseas. No foreign bases or troops outside of the 50 states, none, zero, around the world, perhaps a 10,000 troops is all we "need" here in America, that is all. Perhaps a thousand boats and planes and subs right here around the contentment USA, that is all we need to keep America "safe". More over, the future will hold NEW weapons as THE weapons to have. The ones we have today, soon to be obsolete, so I don't think having lots and lots of them are wise. And most of all, I think we would be perfectly "safe" as long as we END THE DRUG WAR and KEEP THE 2ND AMENDMENT.

Invest in Liberty, one Apartment deal at a time with me. Get a check each month as a passive investor, just ask me how.

Ron Paul wishes for a strong military defense

Not a global empire that these conscienceless leaders are striving to become!, He can use this against Obama, it could make RP look strong, but Obama is a sneaky sociopath, he takes different forms and distracts the mass, and knows exactly when to make headlines and decisions right, We have to do the same, we have to assume formlessness, and be sneaky too!, fight fire with fire,
I AM TIRED OF THE OBAMA FAMILY LIVING LAVISHLY WITH THE MONEY THAT AMERICANS, WHO BY THE WAY ARE JUST ABOVE POVERTY LINE NOW, WORKED FOR!, MICHELLE OBAMA SPENDS 50,000$ ON PRADA, AND GUCCI CLOTHES AND HAD THE WHOLE AVENUE TO HERSELF, THESE PEOPLE ARE DEVOID OF EMPATHY, Its not that there out of touch with reality, it's that they know very well whats happening but they don't GIVE A SH@#!, we have to really wake up and look at these so called leaders in a psychological perspective, then you will see the reality of our situation

I don't think Paul will go on this.

Since he is anti-war.

Its not about war

It is not war...It is defense.. I agree with cutting down under the right circumstances. Treaties have been the norm;, where all parties involved drop the numbers. If you read the article Russia has been building while Chinas numbers are unknown. With Ron Paul its all about diplomacy.

Sorry

Cutting nuclear arsenal is a very good idea. I doubt Obama would do it, he is again just lying to look like the peace president while starting war after war.

Is there another Nobel Price coming up?

Its not about wether he will do it

Its about Ron Paul getting a better position with His foreign policy without aggression. Like bringing all the troops home and protecting our borders here. Dont cut our defense! Get our troops home!

Agree

Bump this

***********Ron Paul for POTUS 2012***********
*************Obama Is A Communist!************
**********Repeal the 17th Amendment**********
Double the size of the House of Representatives
$$$$$$$$$AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE$$$$$$$$$$