Freepers, many of whom fondly recall the clarity and mutual paranoia of the Cold War, freak out.
It really crystallizes how simple-minded they are.
BenLurkin skips over proving this is a problem straight to assuming evil motives.
It can’t be stupidity. Nobody is that stupid.LibWhacker has a name for this public government policy carried out over multiple administrations:
At this point it can only be malice.
Treason. Don’t forget Ethel and Julius, you bastards.Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America blames women in power.
The overwhelming influence of estrogen on the nation’s DEADLY decisions cannot be overstated. Kissing Cuba’s azz without any concessions in return. Surrendering to North Korea, blah blah blah blah and so on and so forth. 0bama having been raised by a single feminist whitey-hating mother and a transgender, cross-dressing nanny shines through in every decision he makes. I’m SICK of it.Freepers' women hating is already getting awesome.
cpdiii does not bother with analysis of any kind:
The USA has 4008 and Russia has approximately 8000. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?Blood of Tyrants delves into what sort of monster doesn't love an ever growing nuclear arsenal:
The left actually believes that a weaker US makes a safer world because they cannot differentiate between good and evil.vox_freedom must be referring to Iran's 4,000 imaginary nukes.
WTH? Is the US falling behind Iran?RetiredArmy - America is now dead. Also, America sucks.
Exactly the words that America’s commie and izzlamic enemies wanted to hear and exactly the death toll for this nation. In war you do not reduce your forces or your ammo. You add. But not in a liberal, commie, socialist, race bating, homo America.ScottinVA knows what liberals want:
Of course the liberals’ dream scenario is the U.S. being subjected to nuclear blackmail by China in the near future. They believe this country deserves to be smacked down hard.Always A Marine delves a bit into military doctrine, to prove that the American military would be ineffective without infinite nukes:
At a time when conventional armed forces are becoming crushingly expensive, nuclear weapons remain the ace in the hole that keeps the ultimate peace. We wince at the once-mighty Royal Navy’s struggle to afford only 6 destroyers, 13 frigates and 10 submarines, but we will soon face similar drastic cutbacks. Without an overwhelming nuclear advantage to back up conventional forces that are too thin to withstand combat attrition, America will become risk averse and impotent. Of course, that appears to be the goal.Ragnar54 fires up the conspiracy jets:
Where did they go?SaraJohnson makes a prediction, and then detours into just spiteful death fantasies about Obama.
Remember øbola’s in charge.
Good question. Most likely a lot of them were simply given to Obama’s Muslim friends. I wonder if they were shipped overseas or just planted near American cities?
We are probably going to get hit before Obama leaves office. I hope they take out DC while Obama is on a local golf course. He’s community organized the Middle East with jihadists to take over slaughter Christians and take out Israel, too. Now he’s strengthening China, Castro, North Korea and Putin. The fatso in NK is crazy and mean enough to do the nuclear dirty deeds without hesitation.In these times of boring gridlock, gaijin keeps the paranoia fires alight.
That’s what GayMuzzie’s parting shot will be:St_Thomas_Aquinas has a different outlandish prediction:
He’s going to dispose of EVERY SINGLE ONE.
They’ll wrap that up with a bow, and he’ll be crowing about that being his LEGACY.
Right up to the day some weakling nukes US with impunity.
Wait 'til he sells all of our nuclear secrets.A few Freepers with actual experience try to tell everyone to calm down. They are roundly ignored. Because if it confirms their loathing of Obama, facts get lost in the frenzy.
Will anyone stop him?
His final act as president will be the pardoning of every 'political prisoner' in America. It would number in the thousands.
I was a Missile Tech in the Navy in the 80s and 90s, one trident sub with 24 missiles would be more than enough of a nuclear force. That one sub could destroy every enemy, real or perceived. 4000 is a ridiculous stupid number of warheads, and a direct result of small dicked neocons wanting more and more.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I assumed too without any experience. When a militarized government says that there's less nuclear weapons, it never means that there's less firepower! The nuclear weapons now are far more powerful than the ones we had when we needed thousands.
DeleteI'd not go as low as 1 Trident sub. 5 maybe, to allow for maint/upgrade, shore leave, threat coverage and Murphy's law. Throw in an extra 24 missiles for spares and a couple of hundred each of bombs and land based ICBMs to give you flexibility in response and you are good.
DeleteAs part of my job, I've reviewed the DoE's budget. The amount of money we spend maintaining our nuclear stockpile is ridiculous.
Delete100s of billions, IIRC.
EC, my post was meant to illustrate that the load out of one Trident (SSBN, not the refitted SSGNs) has more than enough destructive power. Sure, if any future President had the guts to do what was right, 3 to 5 boats with enough load outs for them in reserve would be a realistic nuclear deterrent, but Lockheed Martin makes way too much money with the fleet size and weapon stockpile that they sold the US to ever allow it to be reduced, after all, every time we loaded missiles, the contractors were the ones in the "Doghouse" up top installing the warheads.
Delete