Start A Petition

Obama's Showdown Over Nukes

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: military, obama, politics, usa )

- 3373 days ago -
The latest U.S. nuclear showdown doesn't involve a foreign enemy. Instead it pits President Barack Obama against his Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, and concerns the question of whether America needs a new generation of nuclear warheads.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Gayla S (50)
Tuesday January 27, 2009, 2:24 pm
With the technology that is available topday, there is no valid reason for nuclear weapons. Einstein and all of his fellow scientists enjoined themselves into the production of the bomb because Hitler allegedly (probably) already had, or was close to it, the technology to blos the US up. What? Could it be that our government lied to these scientists?
Whatever happened to the acclaimed neutron bomb? Destroy people, not the infrastructure on this one, if I remember correctly!

Morgan Griffith (225)
Tuesday January 27, 2009, 7:19 pm
When we all have enough to blow up or at least ruin a major portion of the earth what more do we need. This is not like the next generation of a video game it's blood and guts of real people we are dealing with. Stop the foolishness. Obama if you want the truth, get out of Washington and meet the real folks.

Wednesday January 28, 2009, 3:21 am
Noted. I agree Morgan but he has to sort out the rubbish left behind first.

Eric Straatsma (3802)
Wednesday January 28, 2009, 12:49 pm
"Today's nuclear nightmare tends to focus less on a doomsday exchange with similarly armed rival states than on the nightmare of "loose nukes" falling into the hands of terrorists unaligned with any state and therefore beyond the reach of deterrence. A new batch of nuclear weapons, unfortunately, isn't going to change that."

Who cares how many nukes you have sitting in bunkers, when a dirty bomb goes off inside a major US city? That is what we need to work on.. The only way to assure that is to safely control and/or eliminate all nuclear materials, including medical stuff, so it does not fall into terrorist hands.

Wake up!!! MAD is not the worst thing that can happen.. One nuke exploded at high altitude in the middle of the US can wipe out our entire electric grid, all electronics, and put us back into the stone age...

The least of our worries is how MANY nukes we have or whether they work... Personally I could care less. We have enough to destroy the world five times over...

How about some common sense, instead of more bombs, more bombs, more bombs?

Stephen Brian (23)
Monday December 3, 2012, 2:52 pm
Here is a problem that I think was insufficiently explored in the article:

The Reliable Replacement Warhead is not meant to institute greater MAD. It is intended as a long-term cost-cutting measure. It is meant to replace, not supplement, the existing arsenal.

Azle B (17)
Friday December 14, 2012, 9:06 am
Nuclear is a total loss in power and weapons and should be abandoned. the power cost more energy to produce than it makes. We will never use the weapons.

Bill Reese (138)
Saturday February 23, 2013, 1:22 pm
As long as other countries with idiots at the red button America needs the Nuclear arsenal. How many, we all talk that all the nukes America has are located so they can be used on one country or in one place. Not true, until we understand how many America has in various silos, and their response time, and all where all the nuclear missels are in world are located and the systems that they can be delivered by are identifed, then we really do not have much to say about America's nuclear weapons. America has in the past used the arsenal to hold the Soviet Union at bay, but even then it did not as when Krushev sent the four out dated submarines to protect the freighter delivering the materials for delivery to Cuba, the Captains had secret orders to use their nuclear tip torpedos when they got into trouble. We owe a graditude of thank to a US Destroyer commander for being brave enough and having enough common sense to help one of the disabled Russian Submarines and that Captain passed the word to not use the Nuclear weapon. If Russia was about to use the weapon, you think Iran, Pakistan or North Korea would not? I hope we are not so dumb to think those counrtries would fight with gloves.
I say leave the decision of how many and where they are located up to the Military staff, not the hot headed child we have placed in out White House as he will get us all killed.

Robert K (31)
Friday May 24, 2013, 6:58 am
We have had hot headed children in the White House, but the current resident isn't one of them. Sometimes I wish he were and would just come out and call the Republicans what they are, anti-American liars and scumbags. Now little bushie boy was definitely a hot headed child. And leaving the decisions to the military is both unconstitutionl and the height of stupidity. That's how military coups happen.

Bill Reese (138)
Saturday May 25, 2013, 10:01 pm
Obama is not even an intelligent child. He has cheated his way into the White House and then made false vote talleys to get re-elected a second time. He now is finally getting caught upon at least 4 major scandals and 4 not so major. He is the poorest leader we have had in all the History of the US as he has no idea of anything that is going on around his administration or that is what he say's. He just may have bite off too much this time and will be finally have Benghazi, and the IRS scandals traced back to him. He ordered The DOJ Holder to investigate the order Holder signed to snoop on the Fox News reporter. That is not even asking the fox to watch the hen house it is asking the fox to ask the fox if he ate the Chicken. Mr. Obama is stupid and has been trying to destroy our US Constitution while bringing Muslims into his Cabinet from other countries. Washington D.C. now has the highest income per capita thanks to Obama giving all his people 6 figure salaries while the rest of us struggle. He watched the Benghazi attack on live monitor and yet did not send in a relief force. Did he want Chis and the Seals to die???? Just a question.

Deborah W (6)
Friday June 21, 2013, 7:15 am
"Showdown" under Obama brings new meaning to the word ... short-scripted statements, no questions or discussion, eat it. Can;t get what's wanted, there's always Executive Order.

Peggy A (0)
Saturday August 17, 2013, 2:31 pm

Scott haakon (4)
Monday September 2, 2013, 12:22 pm
Yes we do need better weapons. The fear of chemical weapons being one. destroying chemical weapons is no easy. Blowing them up does not guarantee anything more than spreading the chemical sometime way farther than expected. many of the old style weapons are not effective in all situations. Nukes have limitations.

Bill Reese (138)
Monday September 2, 2013, 9:58 pm
The US Army Chemical Storage facility in Boardman, Oregon has just completed a successful burning of thousands of tons of Chemical canisters with very little challenges. They have proven it can be done, but how many countries want rid themselves of Chemical Weapons?
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.