U.S. Weighs Steep Cuts in Nuclear Force

Discussion in 'Americas' started by asianobserve, Feb 15, 2012.

  1. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    By AP / ROBERT BURNS Tuesday, Feb. 14, 2012
    Time

    (WASHINGTON) — The Associated Press has learned that the Obama administration is weighing sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a possible 80 percent reduction in the number of deployed weapons.

    Even the most modest option would represent a bold disarmament step in an election year and is likely to raise the hackles of Republicans who worry about a smaller military force. Such cuts would be in line with President Barack Obama's 2009 pledge to try to eliminate nuclear weapons.

    No final decision has been made, but the administration is considering three options for lower numbers of weapons than the current treaty limit of 1,550 — ranging from about 1,000 to about 300. That's according to a former U.S. official and a congressional official. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because the strategy has not been publicly announced.


    Read more: U.S. Weighs Steep Cuts in Nuclear Force - TIME
     
  2.  
  3. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    I can already hear somebody cursing: "Oh that Obama the Muslim socialist... *#@#!" :rofl:
     
  4. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,161
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I seriously doubt the Russian Federation or PRC will launch an attack on the US. Time to downsize the stockpile. This will help in two ways:
    • Assuage some fears that RF might have about US nuclear weapons, especially after the Missile Defense Shield row.
    • Trigger RF to follow suit and reduce their own stockpile. They have the world largest stockpile, and maintaining them is a financial nightmare, as much as keeping them secured, lest they fall into wrong hands.
     
  5. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    The biggest advantage on dramatic reduction of nuclear weapons would be on savings. I understand maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive and I must say given the potential for untold destruction of even only 1 ballistic missile with MIRV will be enough to desuade Russia or China from being trigger happy...
     
  6. JayATL

    JayATL Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    USA
    Downgrade! its not just about the numbers but huge costs associated in maintaining it, guarding it etc etc. We don't need buta few hundred . One hundred is more than enough .
     

Share This Page