Obama: No nukes if I'm president

Obama: No nukes if I'm president (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

cyberdude611 -> Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/2/2007 7:40:31 PM)
About 10 days after saying in a Democratic debate that he would be willing to engage in high-level talks with the world's worst dictatorships, he answered a question saying that he would not use nuclear weapons in the mid-east under any circumstance. This has drawn fire from Hillary Clinton who has a double-digit lead over Obama. "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama said. Many analysts say that Obama's conflicting and confusing statements concerning foreign policy is due to inexperience and it may be what ultimately destroys his campaign. Hillary said in response to Obama's statement about nukes: "Presidents should be very careful at all times in discussing the use or non-use of nuclear weapons. ... I don't believe that any president should make any blanket statements with respect to the use or non-use of nuclear weapons," Joe Biden lashed out against Obama's statement too... "It's a well-intended notion he has, but it's a very naïve way of figuring out how you're going to conduct foreign policy.." And Christopher Dodd also made a statement... "Over the past several days, Senator Obama's assertions about foreign and military affairs have been, frankly, confusing and confused. He has made threats he should not make and made unwise categorical statements about military options..." http://www.pr-inside.com/print193423.htm

popeye1250 -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/2/2007 7:54:15 PM)
Him and Hillary lost any chance at my vote when they both voted "for" Bush's amnesty bill. And I want a President who has an itchy trigger finger on that nuclear button to keep our enemies nervous. Sen. Abba dabba just wants to buy the world a coke, doesn't he? He sounds like a State Dept worker. That's the misstake "civilised" people always make when dealing with savages. They assume that just because (they're) civilised then the savages must surely be as well. You need someone a little "bloodthirsty" in the White House.

TheHeretic -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/2/2007 7:59:47 PM)
And he's so "pro-peace," he thinks invading Pakistan might be a good option. I wondered about his lack of experience when he got into this race, now I'm pretty sure... And it turns out, his gift as a speaker isn't so impressive when he's being forced to think on his feet in a live debate.

luckydog1 -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/2/2007 8:25:08 PM)
He has to say what his supporters want doesn't he?

Alumbrado -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 6:28:12 AM)
quote: "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Sounds like other 'naive' candidates for President... "Nobody is more disturbed over the use of Atomic bombs than I am... " HST "The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul." HCH

farglebargle -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 6:32:11 AM)
Nukes: The COWARDS Weapon of Choice. Sounds about right that the Cowards running the US Government would keep them around.

Marc2b -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 7:34:29 AM)
quote: And I want a President who has an itchy trigger finger on that nuclear button to keep our enemies nervous. Maybe not an itchy trigger finger but definitely one who understands that unilateral nuclear disarmament is sheer madness. quote: Sen. Abba dabba just wants to buy the world a coke, doesn't he? I can see him on that hilltop now, he’d fit right in. quote: He sounds like a State Dept worker. That's the misstake "civilised" people always make when dealing with savages. They assume that just because (they're) civilised then the savages must surely be as well. I too am utterly baffled by people who believe that the way to make the bad guys leave us alone is to "show our good intentions" by leaving ourselves defenseless. If this policy worked we could all insure that our homes never get robbed by leaving the front door wide open and posting a sign that said, "No gun, no dog, no security system, we seek dialogue."

Marc2b -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 7:36:58 AM)
quote: Nukes: The COWARDS Weapon of Choice. Sounds about right that the Cowards running the US Government would keep them around. Nukes are the ultimate "there is a limit to how far you can fuck with me" ace up the sleeve.

popeye1250 -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 10:09:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Nukes: The COWARDS Weapon of Choice. Sounds about right that the Cowards running the US Government would keep them around. Yeah, Bush should have used them in W. Pakistan long ago.

Stephann -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 12:28:32 PM)
I personally see a huge difference, between possessing nuclear weapons, and 'asserting' our right to use them. I've nothing but respect for a man who says "I think using nuclear weapons is a bad idea." It is. Our enemies in this case aren't currently attacking us because they do not fear us. They attack us, because it demonstrates their courage to attack a beast they fear. The past twenty years worth of bumbled middle east negotiations have come because we positively refuse to understand why; if we did not have nuclear technology, would we be so quick to say "lets kill every last one of em!!!" I don't apologize for the US being strong. I think it's shameful that we are often irresponsible, with that power. "Because I'm bigger" doesn't give any indication that I am either responsible, or right. Stephan

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 1:26:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama said. Assuming he's good for his word, credit to the bloke. Then again, is there anyone on this planet who thinks using nuclear weapons would be a good idea?

farglebargle -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 2:21:32 PM)
Nope... The only good they've got is for the deterrent effect against OTHER CRAZIES who stockpile them, too. Of course, the cheapness of biotech these days, makes it a minor threat vector at best. As always, the only real defense is a distributed defense-in-depth. This only works well when everyone is armed, and ready to do what needs doing. Otherwise the pussies who WON'T defend themselves dilute the effect too much, and we end up here, where the TSA is now demanding ID and a search to get on buses in Indy.

EPGAH -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 3:15:50 PM)
However, he DID threaten to destroy the "holy" sites of their cult, if pushed! If we had done that 10 years ago, perhaps they would be more humble now. I never thought I'd agree with farglebargle, but HE actually brought up my point: Those who refuse to fight back--in a competent fashion--ruin it for those who WOULD! (And those who fight back incompetently make it worse, by providing "pre-made examples" for the enemy!)

farglebargle -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 3:16:47 PM)
Well, no one has proven themselves more incompetent than W.

EPGAH -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:03:23 PM)
Wow, TWO agreements! But seriously, the only way Iraqui oil would pay ANYTHING for Americans is if Americans still had control of it..."We" have already given that back to Iraq--A government that while backed by us, might or might not be complicit in an early-morning ambush, and whose police are rife with the very terrorists we're trying to destroy! Our troops' main problem, though, is that we're fighting an enemy that are by and large, too cowardly to wear uniforms or anything else identifying them and setting them apart from the civilian population they blend in with and/or hide behind! (And they're willing to blow up not only themselves, but their OWN babies to kill a few more American troops!) I still say that the best solution would be to pull back our GROUND troops, clear and fortify a perimeter around the oil-sites (Hopefully better than we have with our own border--A full YEAR and the fence which Congress started hasn't even begun construction!) Since money is at stake, any hostile incursion would be met with deadly force, outside of our jurisdiction, and therefore, outside our control. Completely deniable, so the media can't lambast our troops for doing their job--it would be the oil-companies' troops doing THEIR job, which is, of course, excusable by the media, right? Alternately, the military could just hit known gathering places for enemy forces with remote-controlled armed drones--but since mosques are among those sites, we'd immedately get slammed by the media for "religious profiling" or some such BS...(Can't fight for a clean reputation and a clean planet at the same time, else you risk effeminizing your military, with disastrous results...Self-fulfilling prediction?) Carpet-bombing of areas in terrorists' control, followed by vague threats of "further retaliation if they do that again" would be the MOST EFFECTIVE solution, but for that reason, it would be the LEAST popular with the media... The only thing criminals understand is force...Go ahead and rebut if you disagree...?

cyberdude611 -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:07:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama said. Assuming he's good for his word, credit to the bloke. Then again, is there anyone on this planet who thinks using nuclear weapons would be a good idea? He doesn't know what he's talking about... He has also recently stated that he would invade Pakistan if elected... Barak Obama is very inexperienced when it comes to foreign policy and international relations. His statements during his campaign have been conflicting and confusing. And his statements on this is more likely to be due to trying to get votes than trying to put forward some radical idea to change policy.

EPGAH -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:13:18 PM)
As to Obama himself, I'm worried a bit about his CHARACTER more than his political posturing. He's best known as the "black male doing blackmail" when he EXPOSED (Innuendo-pun intentional) a political rival has having sex with Jeri Ryan in public...The two were husband and wife, but the opponent was forced to drop out of the race! (Resigining for having sex with your wife...What is this world coming to?) Oh, and he may or may not be a Moslem, depending who asks him, which might be a "slight" conflict-of-interest, given the pseudo-religious status of America's current enemies abroad...? (I.e., our enemies are Moslem, do we want one leading us too? And wouldn't that play into their stated objectives of an American Caliphate?)

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:16:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 He has also recently stated that he would invade Pakistan if elected... Is that a vote winner? Where will it end......... What's the other bloke's election slogan......"thus spoke freedom and liberty, fuck it, I'll nuke Bhutan"? Anyway, aren't the Iranians first in line for the final solution?

cyberdude611 -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:21:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 He has also recently stated that he would invade Pakistan if elected... Is that a vote winner? Where will it end......... What's the other bloke's election slogan......"thus spoke freedom and liberty, fuck it, I'll nuke Bhutan"? Anyway, aren't the Iranians first in line for the final solution? It has to do with capturing Bin Ladin then just picking countries to invade... He said that if the United States recieved accurate intel on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Ladin, and if he was in Pakistan, and if President Mushareff does not get him, that the US should invade and get him.

EPGAH -> RE: Obama: No nukes if I'm president (8/3/2007 4:31:35 PM)
Oh, good, another "quick" invasion that will turn into a multi-year ground-war! I was SO afraid they were going to just gas the whole tunnel-system (The way they do with other pests hiding in holes) or bomb it until it collapsed on him--Painful but efficient--What was I thinking?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.054688E-02