Obama Pledges No First Use of Nuclear Weapons Under Any Circumstances

[jordan179]

Courtesy of banner (http://banner.livejournal.com/862692.html) news from The New York Times ("Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms," by David E. Sanger and Peter Baker, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/ ( Read more... )

Comments

[korgmeister]

At the expense of sounding like a total geek, someone needs to explain to Obama that you don't get Renegade points for shooting back at the Geth.

[zerorevenge]

LOL!! Amazing.

+10 Points.

[korgmeister]

Yeah, Obama is what happens when someone tries to do a pure Paragon run, blind.

[zerorevenge]

LOL. Always picking the option appearing on the NW side of the Karma-Wheel.

[weerdbeard]

On a brighter note I WILL point out that Obama has pretty much lied about EVERYTHING else he's pledged. So saying there will be no first-strike should be as comforting to our enemies as his pledge to end "Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell" is to closeted gays on active duty. Or his pledge to not raise taxes on people making under a quarter-mil. (Guess what, we made under that this year and just did our taxes!)

expiration date

[marycatelli]

He doesn't lie. His promises just have expiration dates.

All of them.

There is a certain amount of amusement in watching baffled souls run across this when it was obvious even during the campaign.

Re: expiration date

[zerorevenge]

His promises just have expiration dates.

Go out, and buy yourself a cake. You earned it. You may now have your cake and eat it too. :D

Re: expiration date

[stauros]

I think that phrase originated with Jim Geraghty of NRO's "Campaign Spot".

President Osama

[affablestranger]

God Almighty! Does that man even know what the fuck he's even saying at any given time... or how it relates to a) reality and b) the things he's said prior?!?

He may be a "gifted" speaker, but he's politically retarded.

Re: President Osama

[unixronin]

I don't think he does, no. I have heard it said in the past, "George Washington couldn't tell a lie; Richard Nixon couldn't tell the truth; [either Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton, I've heard it of both] can't tell the difference." I don't think Obama worries himself with such minor trivia. It doesn't matter to him whether something is true or false, as long as saying it Furthers The Cause. Hence keeping track of what he's said in the past is irrelevant. "That was then; this is now."

As fruitylips once said, "Obama is a hell of an orator, but get him away from his teleprompter and he's W with bigger ears."

The real problem here is that once again Obama is hedging and waffling in front of the world, qualifying every word he utters, unwilling to actually commit to anything. He is telling the world that he has no moral compass, can be pushed around, and will sway whichever way the wind blows. God help us if anyone with the capability to seriously hurt us smells blood in the water, because Obama will fold.

Re: President Osama

[jordan179]

The real problem here is that once again Obama is hedging and waffling in front of the world, qualifying every word he utters, unwilling to actually commit to anything. He is telling the world that he has no moral compass, can be pushed around, and will sway whichever way the wind blows. God help us if anyone with the capability to seriously hurt us smells blood in the water, because Obama will fold.

I think that it's already happened, with regards to the Russians -- fortunately for us, the Russian objectives are mostly limited to the restoration control over the former USSR, and their initial objectives are Central Asian former SSR's we don't really care that much about. The real problem is that the Iranians have more directly hostile ends, and are very close to gaining "the capability to seriously hurt us

Re: President Osama

[the_deuce]

Nope, to Obama, it doesn't matter whether he knows what he's talking about, just as long as he's talking.

The mellifluous sound of his voice is magical you know, and repeated uses of it are the solution to every problem.

[the_deuce]

Obama is setting up a repeat of such a war of miscalculation.

Except that, under Obama, it likely wouldn't be miscalculation. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if he were to leave an ally twisting in the wind after a nuclear attack. Besides, if he gets his way, we wouldn't be able to afford to retaliate even if we wanted to. I somehow doubt the Chinese would give a loan to a country on the edge of default so that they could finance their retaliation against themselves.

[luagha]

Psychologically, a narcissistic personality like Obama's has two options when attacked in a realistic and threatening manner. Either attack back frantically or fold up into a ball as world assumptions are revealed false.

How can we predict which way he is likely to jump?

I would say it depends on whether or not Obama himself is personally insulted.

So, a nerve gas attack on Kansas City, Missouri? "A tragedy," Obama says, and dithers and consults advisors and tries to go to the UN.

A nerve gas attack on Chicago? Rather different.

[yechezkiel]

On the bright side, most of our enemies will think this is an American trick.