US News
McCain pledges to reduce US nuclear force
May 27, 2008, 19:39 GMT
Washington - Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, said Tuesday that he will look to reduce the size of the US nuclear weapons fleet if he wins the White House.
McCain pledged to pursue negotiations with China and Russia on agreements to cut nuclear stockpiles, but said he would also seek a smaller US force while preserving national security.
'I will seek to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number possible consistent with our security requirements and global commitments,' McCain said at the University of Denver in Colorado.
'Today we deploy thousands of nuclear warheads. It is my hope to move as rapidly as possible to a significantly smaller force,' McCain said.
McCain said he would not support any plans to develop an earth- penetrating, bunker-busting nuclear bomb, saying the concept 'does not make strategic or political sense.'
The Bush administration has pursued the technology, only to have Congress strip the funding.
McCain also said the United States should strengthen international treaties on non-proliferation efforts and work closely with allies to prevent the spread of dangerous nuclear technology.
'We cannot achieve our non-proliferation goals on our own,' McCain said.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
... and that may be exactly why he's bringing it up.
Bush, based on his early contacts with Putin, should have been able to navigate towards an improved Arms Control Treaty, and a bilateral reduction in warheads. At that time the Russian economy was hurting, and they did not have the funding needed for their military - an ideal time to talk about it.
Instead, Bush will be remembered for angering Putin by bringing up anti-missile defense in former Soviet satellites; apparently not having the sense to quietly discuss it with Putin first.
(July 2007)
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6898690.stm
Russian President Vladimir Putin has suspended the application of a key Cold War arms control treaty. Mr Putin signed a decree citing 'exceptional circumstances' affecting security as the reason for the move. Russia has been angered by US plans to base parts of a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
The bunker-busters were proposed to get at hardened underground nuclear sites, which describes Iran. Here's an article describing the problems with the concept, which Bush pushed for.
globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2093
(2006)
The latest information I have had from the followers of Bush is that he has demanded and received permission to use nuclear “bunker busters” in Iran in a preemptive strike. As a nuclear veteran (Operation Redwing, Bikini, 1956) I can affirm that this is absolute madness. The “bunker buster” is a cute sounding name for a nuclear horror. Air bursts are horrible enough, doing incredible destruction through heat, shock and high initial radiation. The fallout from an air burst is registered around the world. A surface or subsurface burst is even deadlier and more long lasting.
what the hell ails this rino? If this was a demonrat candidate talking like this we would try to take him out back for a sunday afternoon lynching. It is a sad day to say that the grand old party has lost its way nominating McCain.
'Instead, Bush will be remembered for angering Putin by bringing up anti-missile defense in former Soviet satellites; apparently not having the sense to quietly discuss it with Putin first.'
Poland and the Czech Republic are sovereign countries. Do we ask Putin's permission every time we negotiate with another country?
'globalresearch.ca' is not a source for anything other then that special virulent, jealousy borne anti-Americanism that the some Canadians (and idiots like you) like to indulge in.
'The latest information I have had from the followers of Bush is that he has demanded and received permission to use nuclear “bunker busters” in Iran in a preemptive strike. '
Gee, you got this information from whom? Kos or globalresearch.ca?
' As a nuclear veteran (Operation Redwing, Bikini, 1956) I can affirm that this is absolute madness. '
As if you are a veteran of anything other then an Iranian madrassah. A bunker buster would be non-atmospheric. There is a huge difference between an atmospheric test and an Underground explosion.
'A surface or subsurface burst is even deadlier and more long lasting.'
Sure, that is why no one lives in New Mexico, Nevada Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
That is just complete hogwash.
'Underground nuclear testing refers to test detonations of nuclear weapons that are performed underground. When the device being tested is buried at sufficient depth, the explosion may be contained, with no release of radioactive materials to the atmosphere.'
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_nuclear_testing
Between 1951 and 1992, there were a total of 928 announced nuclear tests at Nevada Test Site. Of those, 828 were underground.[1] (Sixty-two of the underground tests included multiple, simultaneous nuclear detonations, adding 93 detonations and bringing the total number of NTS nuclear detonations to 1,021, of which 921 were underground.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Test_Site
Regardless... It would have been better for the Iranians to have limited yield, deep penetrating and focused American bunker buster bombs then the probably inevitable Israeli counterstrike with atmospheric uranium, plutonium and hydrogen bombs.
The primary motive for building the nuclear bunker buster was North Korea, not Iran. Of course, China and Iran are both reputed to be extending and strengthening their underground infrastructure, so this weapon naturally had wider strategic implications than one might at first believe.
This system, along with the missile defense systems should both be dropped. Neither is particularly useful. There are other ways to skin those cats.
As for Senator McCain and his plans for the future, however, the the Mercury News raises a valid point:
'But McCain's talk of nuclear cooperation with Russia raised questions about how receptive Moscow might be to McCain if he were elected, since another of his proposals - excluding Russia from the Group of Eight industrialized countries - seems sure to test relations.'
The man's policy ideas are COMPLETELY incoherent and uncoordinated.
The New York Sun does an even better job of pointing out just how loony Senator McCain's proposed policies are:
//www.nysun.com/national/mccain-pledges-to-work-with-russia-to-reduce/7 8734/
The man does not have a consistent bone in his body. He will, if elected, be a truly terrible president.
...johnny is not hip. There will never be the Johnny Vagi-ceegar, or the Johnny I'm-the-1st-black president! No Johnny I-HAD-FORTY-HOOCHIES-IN-MY-DORM. Honestly, what a gyp!
In a race where the positions are so close, no debate will occur and the personality will be the winner. Besides, these senators have all been caught undercutting theirpositions, so just what ARE their positions????
page: 1
Stan46May 27th, 2008 - 22:07:33
I recently read his book. This guy has some real attributes. There is not a single candidate with more experience. I am most impreesed with how moderate he is.
Report this comment