Obama wants $80 billion to upgrade nuclear arms complex

[defendandprotect]

Obama wants $80 billion to upgrade nuclear arms complex

Excerpt --

Kerry said the $80 billion funding request was the largest since the Cold War.

"It demonstrates the Obama administration's commitment to keeping America's nuclear deterrent safe and effective for a generation to come," Kerry said in a statement.

Kerry's committee is planning to roll out Republican political heavyweights to testify, including former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and James Baker.

Obama has made nuclear nonproliferation one of the main goals of his presidency and last month unveiled a policy restricting U.S. use of nuclear weapons.

He has also renounced the development of new atomic weapons and in May disclosed for the first time the current size of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Russia said on Wednesday it may lift the veil on its nuclear arsenal after the treaty with the United States comes into force.




http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100513/pl_nm/us_usa_russia_nuclear

[Newsjock]

1. Heaven forbid we can blow up the planet only 43 times

And those slimy Russians can blow it up 44 times. We'd be screwn.

[The Damned]

25. I don't have a problem with this

I still don't trust the fucking Russians!

[Statistical]

34. This isn't for new or more weapons.

Obama has already signed agreement to cut arsenal and our current arsenal is about 1/4 of the peak.

The money is to improve security so one of these death dealers don't get lost/stolen/used.

[HereSince1628]

2. WHY????? We've sold everything to the Chinese that we wanted to protect

during the Cold War.

This is just STUPID!

[hayu_lol]

3. Kerry is really hanging out with the lowest of the low...

Lieberman, Kissinger, and Baker.

Whoda thunk it?

Time for Kerry to retire.

[Moochy]

39. He was going to run the war better than Bush after all..

[ladjf]

4. No.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

6. Everyone was opposed to Kerry . . . he was at .03% in the primaries . . . and

then poof! . . . he was the candidate -- given to us by TPB.

Truth be told, I feel the same caution about many of them . . .

they've been around too long and too much corporate money and connections.

Maybe it's impossible to maintain anti-war positions in a MIC world?

Kerry was certainly anti-VN war -- was eloquent on that subject -- testified.

BCCI . . . but over time . . . ???

As they say, you can only really be betrayed by those closest to you.

[ProSense]

10. What nonsense. n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

11. I'm not quite sure that's accurate. He won the primaries pretty handily.

[defendandprotect]

27. When the candidates were first mentioned, listed . . . Kerry was LEAST popular ... .03% ...

As other more favorable opponents were knocked out, we were left with Kerry --

I don't either remember all of the other candidates mentioned at this point, either --

but I do know Kerry was "bottom of the barrel" among them all --

The point being -- we are given our leadership by TPB --

[AllentownJake]

29. The hit job done on Dean by the media was epic

and yes that benefited two people, John Edwards and John Kerry. I think Senator Edwards stepped a little off the reservation in 2008, and he got what he had coming to them for that.

All of these men have skeletons in closets, because we all have skeletons in closets.

TPTB reveal such skeletons to the idiot masses when needed, odd thing, other than calling him nuts...Dr. Dean appears to be pretty fucking boy scoutish.

[defendandprotect]

32. Accurate and interesting post . . ..

Agree -- everyone, especially politicians, I guess -- is vulnerable re 'skeletons' --

But, my feeling is that no one advances unless there is a way to pull them back if

necessary. Like Clarence Thomas and his horrific background!

I think Senator Edwards stepped a little off the reservation in 2008, and he got what he had coming to them for that.

Interesting insight --

And couldn't agree with you more re the attack on Dean!!

Still going on as a matter of fact!!

:)

[ProSense]

31. Kerry won because he was the best candidate.

You can sit around and make all kinds of excuses as to why people voted for him.

I know, they picked Obama too.

[ShortnFiery]

15. +1000.

:thumbsup:

[ProSense]

8. "we don't give a shit about your fucking profits and bloodlust."

Yeah, the START treaty sucks.

[Karmadillo]

7. Is this budget neutral or do we need to cut social security to make it happen?

nt

[SemiCharmedQuark]

9. This is part of the nuclear arms REDUCTION treaty, no?

[ShortnFiery]

12. Lovely.

IMO, Kerry was always pro-corporate right wing.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kuzminski08182004.html

Voting for Kerry is marginally better than voting for Bush, or wasting a vote for Nader. But it's rather like voting for Marius and Caesar (the Democrats) rather than Sulla and Pompey (the Republicans). A more benevolent despot is always better than a less benevolent one, but despotism it remains all the same. Can we pretend otherwise any longer?

[ProSense]

14. "Voting for Kerry is marginally better than voting for Bush, or wasting a vote for Nader."

Counterpuke morons.

[ShortnFiery]

16. Absolutely accurate. Lest we forget Kerry voted for the IWR knowing that it would

lead us to war? He cared more about his political welfare than that of the American or Iraq people.

We all KNEW that if Bush received the votes in the IWR Bill, he would INVADE IRAQ.

Kerry showed "feet of clay" and he's been true to that cowardice ever since.

[ProSense]

18. "We all KNEW that if Bush received the votes in the IWR Bill, he would INVADE IRAQ."

Yeah, only the smart ones realized that Bush wouldn't have invaded Iraq without it.

He had such respect for Congress.

[ShortnFiery]

19. Yes, by jove, I believe you've got that right.

:thumbsup:

Bush was NOT stupid and needed Congressional COVER. He got exactly what he wanted thanks to the gutless wonder democrats in Congress worried about their political clout before the welfare of our troops or the innocent Iraq people.

[ProSense]

20. "He got exactly what he wanted thanks to the gutless wonder democrats in Congress "

The IWR vote was always an excuse for people to act like fools.

The vote doesn't determine who is a hero or not, and the corporatist label is being thrown around demonstrates the level of cluelessness associated with this BS outrage.

Byron Dorgan voted for the IWR. He's a progressive champion, and no one who is currently distorting the climate bill is going to call him out for his defense of coal.

Bush is responsible for starting the war.

[defendandprotect]

36. Why wouldn't we call out Byron Dorgan for defense of coal?

This idea that someone is picking on your favorite is nonesense . . .

No one who supports war is right or should be defended --

and no one who supports burning of fossil fuels should be defended --

[ProSense]

22. And while Kerry was calling for regime change in the U.S.

other Democrats were sounding supportive.

[MadHound]

13. Another 80 billion for the military

Why do we need "upgrades"? What, spanning the globe carrying a few hundred megatons in twenty minutes isn't apocolyptic enough?

We have money for wars, we have money for the MIC, we have money for Wall St. Where's some money for the rest of the country?

[ShortnFiery]

17. And next, the ghouls in Congress will be targeting our Social Security.

:grr:

[FiveGoodMen]

37. ...which we simply won't be able to afford anymore!

(Where has all that money gone, again?)

[blogslut]

26. Because plutonium pits never die

This isn't about making new nukes. This is about upgrading the weaponry, storage and security for existing nuclear materials.

About forty miles from my house there are hundreds of plutonium pits sitting in storage containers that are degrading. The plutonium within them will be active for tens of thousands of years. We have to keep building fresh storage or the effort is pointless. As well, outdated weapons arrive at that plant that must be dismantled and re-fitted with new housing.

With nuclear weapons, we made shit that we can't just throw away - ever. The US doesn't manufacture new nuclear weapons anymore. Instead, we are forced to continually retro-fit the cores that we've already created.

It sucks but the alternative sucks more.

[MadHound]

28. I recognize that basic maintenance has to be done,

However I also recognize that the DOE already pulls down billions each year in the annual budget to do exactly what you're talking about, maintenance and keeping the nuclear fleet safe.

No, this is money that is being used for spending above and beyond normal everyday maintenance.

[ecstatic]

21. self delete

[Moochy]

23. Hooray for SAFE NYOOKS

Change you have to believe in to see!

[ProSense]

24. START treaty is change

Important and historic change.

[unhappycamper]

30. Great.. Henry the K and James 'the fixer' Baker

Neocons everywhere you turn. :(

[Cetacea]

35. James Baker. The Quiet president.

[Moochy]

38. The Plutocrats behind the democrats and republicans

[amborin]

33. knr