WASHINGTON — President Obama said Monday that he was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons, even in self defense [My emphasis – BZ].
Discussing his approach to nuclear security the day before formally releasing his new strategy, Mr. Obama described his policy as part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions. To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary.
He (Obama) dodged when asked whether he shared Israel’s view that a “nuclear capable” Iran was as dangerous as one that actually possessed weapons.
And oddly enough, this comes on the heels of an announcement that Chavez in Venezuela has decided that it is time for him to become a nuclear power — to be aided and abetted by Putin’s Russia.
North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, — wanting nuclear weapons now.
Russia, China — in possession of nuclear weapons and now Wild Cards in the political nuclear landscape.
Mr Obaka still thinks that if we sit down at a table and pour ourselves a nice tea, we can work anything out.
His policy indicates that, any non-nuclear power will not be the recipient of our nukes no matter their attack on us in immediacy, be it in chemical, biological, digital or dirty nuclear in nature.
I literally question the sanity of our so-called president.
Is he so daft and thick as to not realize the True Evil exists in this world? That there is no such thing as American Exceptionalism?
Why is it that we would purposely take any responsive option off the table?
We are in the midst of a defeatistcoup d’etat in Amerika.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says he “will surely” retire while President Barack Obama is still in office, giving the president the opportunity to maintain the high court’s ideological balance.
Do you think the GOP will be able to muster any kind of thorough investigation and vetting into their pick?
As many of you enjoy Easter, other people seem to have other plans for you, particularly if you’re older.
Anyone besides myself interested in the detached, apathetic and dismissive manner in which this panel and Krugman in particular address the potential deaths of older people and the benefit in terms of — COST — in doing away with them?
With this philosophy, then, my father would not have received even his first colon cancer operation at 80. He would not have lived his additional eight years wherein he toured the Columbia River on a paddlewheeler, went for cruises on the Mexican Riviera and the Inside Passage, enjoyed sportfishing trips to San Diego with my brother, enjoyed birthdays, anniversaries, numerous Thanksgiving and Christmases with his family.
This Easter, when you think of Christ’s awakening, later, perhaps tonight, think of your blessings and then, reflect on just what it is that the Left have planned for our national elderly. And what is planned for you if you’re over, say, 50. And what is planned for you, my younger reader, if you have the temerity to age.
And what won’t be planned for our politicians who enabled this abortion of a plan.
Author Richard Poe wrote: “According to a 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services, five percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 50 percent of health care spending in America. Who are those five percent? Most are people over 65 years of age with serious, chronic illnesses.
Do the Logical Extension, my brothers and sisters. Anyone over 65, under this plan, will be a burden and drain on the program. It is fiscally beneficial to do away with you after 65. Question for you: how many politicians in DC, do you suppose, are over 65?
Sarah Palin was ridiculed and shot down in flames for even thinking such a thing. And so, here is a panel, today, on Easter, distanced and elite, thinking: well, in the long run, it may proffer some wonderful cost savings. . .
You think about this, America. You think about it real hard.
The TelegraphUK wonders if now isn’t a good time; why is it we hear or read nothing of this from the US media?
With many voters yearning for an outsider, and military officers looked up to, General David Petraeus could be a powerful presidential candidate and a potentially accomplished President.
This is the British media calling a US general “accomplished“?
And I ask: if ObakaKare is all that mind-glazingly wonderful, then:
1. Why isn’t Mr Obaka going to take his own medicine? His wife? His children? 2. Why isn’t Congress? 3. Why haven’t all the Demorat Congressmen and -women gone back to their constituents to crow and howl about the pleasures of ObakaKare? 4. Why is it necessary to say The People will “learn to love it.” Yes people, oh you’ll learn.
Finally:
If ObakaKare is so glorious and The People are backing him, why is there no massive residual positive bounce to Mr Obaka’s polling numbers?
