{"id":7237,"date":"2012-02-15T11:46:34","date_gmt":"2012-02-15T19:46:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/?p=7237"},"modified":"2012-02-15T11:46:34","modified_gmt":"2012-02-15T19:46:34","slug":"suicidal-in-chief-obama-destroying-americas-nuclear-defense","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/2012\/02\/suicidal-in-chief-obama-destroying-americas-nuclear-defense\/","title":{"rendered":"Suicidal-in-Chief Obama Destroying America’s Nuclear Defenses"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Suicidal-in-Chief by Bill Gertz –
\nLowest level of strategic review would leave Pentagon with fewer warheads than China<\/strong>
\nPresident Obama has ordered the Pentagon to consider cutting U.S. strategic nuclear forces to as low as 300 deployed warheads\u2014below the number believed to be in China\u2019s arsenal and far fewer than current Russian strategic warhead stocks.<\/p>\n

Pentagon and military planners were asked to develop three force levels for the U.S. arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads: a force of 1,100 to 1,000 warheads; a second scenario of between 700 and 800 warheads; and the lowest level of between 300 and 400 warheads.<\/p>\n

A congressional official said no president in the past ever told the Pentagon to conduct a review based on specific numbers of warheads.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the past, the way it worked was, \u2018tell me what the world is like and then tell me what the force should be,\u2019\u201d the official said. \u201cThat is not happening in this review.\u201d <\/p>\n

The plan for a radical cut in warheads is contained in a review of nuclear weapons ordered by the president in an August directive. The review called the Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study is nearing completion and could be presented to the president as early as next month.<\/p>\n

The plan has come under fire from senior military officers in charge of maintaining nuclear deterrence against Russia, China, and future nuclear rogue states.<\/p>\n

Asked about the opposition, a senior officer involved in strategic arms declined to comment.<\/p>\n

Critics of the nuclear force cuts in Congress and the national security community said the force structure is being studied without matching the need for nuclear forces to combat growing threats, as was done in past strategic nuclear reviews.<\/p>\n

Currently, the U.S. arsenal includes about 5,000 warheads, many of them slated for dismantlement. Russia has between 4,000 and 6,500 warheads and China is believed to have more than 300.<\/p>\n

Pentagon spokesman George Little declined to comment on the specific force levels being examined in the review.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile the details are classified, the president asked DoD to develop several alternative approaches to deterrence and stability, to include illustrative force size and postures to best support those alternatives,\u201d Little said. \u201cAs part of the NPR implementation study, DOD is evaluating these alternatives using policy criteria outlined in the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.\u201d<\/p>\n

John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador and undersecretary of state for international security during the George W. Bush administration, said in an interview that the administration\u2019s plan to cut nuclear force to as low as 300 \u201calone is sufficient to vote against Obama in November.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cCongress should urgently adopt a resolution rejecting the idea that any of these levels is consistent with American national security,\u201d Bolton said. \u201cLet\u2019s just see who is prepared to support Obama.\u201d<\/p>\n

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney said even considering such deep strategic cuts is irrational.<\/p>\n

\u201cNo sane military leader would condone 300 to 400 warheads for an effective nuclear deterrent strategy,\u201d McInerney told the Washington Free Beacon.<\/p>\n

\u201cGoing down to 1000 to 1,100 is risky enough and frankly in today\u2019s world, very risky. The purpose of our nuclear force structure is to deter any adversary from even thinking that they could minimize our attack options. Such thinking is very dangerous and will only encourage our adversaries to make bold decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n

A congressional official and former administration official familiar with the ongoing review said the bottom level warhead levels raise serious questions about whether a nuclear force that size would deter adversaries. It also would raise questions about so-called \u201cextended deterrence,\u201d the threat to use nuclear weapons against states like North Korea on behalf of allies like Japan.<\/p>\n

The new strategic review reflects the president\u2019s 2009 speech in Prague when he said the United States would pursue peace and security in a world \u201cwithout nuclear weapons.\u201d<\/p>\n

In 2010, the administration issued its Nuclear Posture Review that reduced the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. military posture. Then in March, Thomas Donilon, White House National Security Adviser, said in a speech the administration was making plans for \u201cthe next round of nuclear reductions.\u201d<\/p>\n

Under the U.S.-Russia New START arms treaty, U.S. nuclear forces will be cut to 1,550 warheads.<\/p>\n

Rep. Michael Turner, R-Ohio and chairman of the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, said during a hearing in November that he is concerned about planned cuts in nuclear forces.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe administration reviews are all being done to support further U.S. reductions,\u201d Turner said, \u201cThis is concerning.\u201d<\/p>\n

U.S. officials say the failure of the United States to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent force would likely lead to other nations developing nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n

Senior members of the Saudi Arabian royal family recently discussed the kingdom\u2019s development of nuclear arms in response to Iran\u2019s covert nuclear program.<\/p>\n

And South Korea and Japan could decide to develop nuclear arsenals to deter North Korea\u2019s and China\u2019s nuclear forces.<\/p>\n

James Miller, deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, told Congress in November that the NPR implementation study, when completed, will result in \u201cmore detailed planning guidance to the military, and then [U.S. Strategic Command] will revise its military plans.\u201d The review will also be used for \u201cfuture arms control proposals,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Air Force Gen. Robert Kehler, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, said during the same hearing with Miller that the 2010 nuclear review \u201cvalidated the continuing need for a triad\u201d of missiles, bombers, and missile-firing submarines.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese plans are essential to maintaining long term confidence in our nuclear deterrent capabilities,\u201d Kehler said. \u201cUnfortunately, the nuclear enterprise simultaneously faces significant capitalization challenges and extraordinary fiscal pressures.\u201d<\/p>\n

The administration committed to spending as much as $85 billion over 10 years to modernize U.S. nuclear forces and infrastructure as part of the Senate\u2019s New START ratification debate in 2010.<\/p>\n

However, some on Capitol Hill are calling the administration\u2019s commitment to nuclear modernization into question.<\/p>\n

Kehler\u2019s predecessor at Stratcom, Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, told a recent congressional hearing that the 1,550 warheads under New START are the lowest level for security and deterrence.<\/p>\n

When asked if the New START levels included more warheads than needed, Chilton said: \u201cI do not agree that it is more than is needed. I think the arsenal that we have is exactly what is needed today to provide the deterrent.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kenneth deGraffenreid, a former Reagan administration National Security Council official, said in an interview that the plans for sharp nuclear cuts are \u201cpart of the administration\u2019s purposeful decline of American military power.\u201d<\/p>\n

The damage to nuclear forces is compounded by \u201cmassive reductions across the board in defense spending on conventional forces,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cDefense is the only part of government this administration is reducing,\u201d he said. \u201cThere wasn\u2019t a single dollar of stimulus money spent on defense.\u201d<\/p>\n

HT: The Washington Free Beacon<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Bill Gertz – Lowest level of strategic review would leave Pentagon with fewer warheads than China President Obama has ordered the Pentagon to consider cutting U.S. strategic nuclear forces to as low as 300 deployed warheads\u2014below the number believed to be in China\u2019s arsenal and far fewer than current Russian strategic warhead stocks. Pentagon … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":497,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"generate_page_header":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[72,74,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7237","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-leftism","category-leftist-lunatic-fringe","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7237","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/497"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7237"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7237\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7237"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7237"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7237"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}