Flasshbacks:
Obama 2008:
Obama Administration Russia reset with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton March 2009
Obamalateral Disarmament — U.S. To Cut ICBM Squadron
Posted 11/21/2013 07:03 PM
Defense: Breaking yet another promise, this one to Congress, the administration jeopardizes our national security with plans to eliminate an entire squadron of intercontinental ballistic missiles and destroy its silos.
Yet another example of what President Obama meant in 2012 when he promised Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, that after his re-election he would have more "flexibility" on defense issues, comes on the news that an ICBM squadron would be scrapped to comply with the New START Treaty — even as both the Russians and Chinese deploy new ballistic missiles.
A document prepared by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon maps out a strategy to eliminate an ICBM squadron — and destroy its missile silos — by Dec. 5, 2017.
The military would begin removing ICBMs next October, after an environmental assessment is complete, and the silo elimination would begin in May 2016.
The fact is, as the Heritage Foundation notes, the U.S. does not need to eliminate an ICBM squadron to meet New START's limits. The State Department's Oct. 1 fact sheet says the U.S. must dismantle 109 of its deployed ICBMs, deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and deployed heavy bombers, and remove another 138 warheads.
Heritage notes the U.S. has already reduced its deployed warheads by 112 and that destroying an ICBM squadron to comply with New START is unnecessary.
Further cuts, if needed, could be made by removing the missiles and placing the silos in reserve status.
The document says the reductions are necessary to "meet the New START Treaty compliance date by closing an ICBM squadron and eliminating the associated Launch Facilities." But that's not true. New START does not require destruction of the silos.
So why the unnecessary move to cut our offensive missile deterrent force after the administration has scrapped Phase IV of our European-based missile defense, which was the proposed replacement for the ground-based interceptors and missile radars that were scuttled in a betrayal of our Polish and Czech allies?
The president has said he dreams of a world without nuclear weapons, which critics point out seems to mean only a world without U.S. nukes.
He sees U.S. military supremacy as an anachronistic example of the American exceptionalism for which he has apologized so many times.
To that end, in his June 2013 Berlin speech, President Obama spoke of his desire to unilaterally reduce deployed U.S. nuclear forces by up to one-third.
Despite Promises, Obama Planning to Close ICBM Squadron by 2016
President vowed New START treaty would not cause reduction in ICBM force
The Obama Administration plans to shutdown an ICBM squadron by 2016 / AP
BY:
Alana Goodman
November 21, 2013 4:59 am
The Obama administration has drafted a plan to shutter an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) squadron three years after it assured hesitant lawmakers that the New START U.S.-Russia arms reduction treaty would not lead to deep cuts in the ICBM force.
A new timeline prepared by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and obtained by the
Washington Free Beacon maps out a strategy to eliminate an ICBM squadron—and destroy its missile silos—by Dec. 5, 2017. An environmental assessment would begin next month.
The document says the reductions are necessary to “meet the New START Treaty compliance date by closing an ICBM squadron and eliminating the associated Launch Facilities.”
Several Democrats on the Senate ICBM coalition voted for New START, vowing that the treaty would maintain a strong ICBM force. Sens. Max Baucus (D.) and Jon Tester (D.), both from Montana, the home of many ICBMs, issued a press release in 2010 backing New START and saying that the missiles would “continue to play a key role in U.S. national security for decades to come.”
“There was some talk around this town about making deep reductions to the ICBM force,” Baucus said in the press release. “We made it clear to the president that was unacceptable, and fought hard to make sure the START Treaty recognized the critical role that ICBMs play in U.S. national security.”
Baucus and Tester did not respond to requests for comment.
According to the OSD timeline, the military would begin removing ICBM missiles from their silos next October, after the environmental assessment is complete. The silo elimination would begin in May 2016 and is estimated to take 19 months.
Analysts say they are particularly troubled by the proposed destruction of the missile silos, a likely permanent move that is not required by New START. They say the silos would be difficult to rebuild if the military needs to bolster its ICBM force in the future.
“If you destroy the silos, it would be much harder to rebuild them [...] and very politically difficult,” said Michaela Dodge, a defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
Dodge said the New START requirements could be met simply by removing the ICBMs and maintaining the empty silos in reserve status.
The administration’s plan would also shrink the ICBM force below the mandated numbers. The Air Force previously said it
planned to reduce its number of ICBMs from 450 to a baseline of 420 under New START.
Shutting down a squadron would eliminate 50 ICBMs, 66 percent more than the prior Air Force proposal.
Republican members of the Senate ICBM coalition said they were alarmed by the proposal.
“America’s nuclear deterrent helps keep Americans safe and our country free,” Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) told the
Free Beacon. “As countries that are not our friends grow closer to modernizing their nuclear weapons programs, it would be irresponsible for us to weaken our own program.”
“If the president is serious about protecting Americans and our allies, he should immediately drop any plans for his Administration to further reduce our ICBMs,” he said.
Sen. Mike Enzi’s (R., Wyo.) office said he “opposes efforts that would impose arbitrary and unilateral reductions in our nuclear force. He believes this would only increase threats to our national security and have a very visible effect on our deterrence strategy. A strong ICBM force is a critical part of protecting our nation. That’s why he opposed the New START Treaty and other attempts to hamstring the role Wyoming plays in our nuclear deterrent.”
The ICBM coalition introduced an amendment on Friday that would block the administration from destroying emptied ICBM silos.
Defense experts say the proposed eliminations would be detrimental to U.S. national security.
“We see that Russia is modernizing and building up its nuclear weapons program; we don’t have that good of an understanding of how many weapons China has; we had recently a North Korea nuclear weapons test,” Dodge said. “So international trends are against us and we are sending the wrong signal by continuing reduction despite these international developments.”
John Noonan, spokesman for House Armed Services Committee Republicans, said there does not appear to be any strategic justification for the proposed reductions, adding that the United States has a responsibility to maintain a large and disperse ICBM force that will deter large-scale enemy attacks.
“Nuclear deterrence is about balance,” he said “This is something that would put the deterrence equation out of balance.”
"FLEXABILITY" - Obama orders ICBM squadron disbanded, silos filled.
"FLEXABILITY" - Obama orders ICBM squadron disbanded, silos filled.(INV).
Defense: Breaking yet another promise, this one to Congress, the administration jeopardizes our national security with plans to eliminate an entire squadron of intercontinental ballistic missiles and destroy its silos.
Yet another example of what President Obama meant in 2012 when he promised Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, that after his re-election he would have more "flexibility" on defense issues, comes on the news that an ICBM squadron would be scrapped to comply with the New START Treaty — even as both the Russians and Chinese deploy new ballistic missiles.
A document prepared by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon maps out a strategy to eliminate an ICBM squadron — and destroy its missile silos — by Dec. 5, 2017.
The military would begin removing ICBMs next October, after an environmental assessment is complete, and the silo elimination would begin in May 2016.
The fact is, as the Heritage Foundation notes, the U.S. does not need to eliminate an ICBM squadron to meet New START's limits. The State Department's Oct. 1 fact sheet says the U.S. must dismantle 109 of its deployed ICBMs, deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and deployed heavy bombers, and remove another 138 warheads.
Heritage notes the U.S. has already reduced its deployed warheads by 112 and that destroying an ICBM squadron to comply with New START is unnecessary.
Further cuts, if needed, could be made by removing the missiles and placing the silos in reserve status.
The document says the reductions are necessary to "meet the New START Treaty compliance date by closing an ICBM squadron and eliminating the associated Launch Facilities." But that's not true. New START does not require destruction of the silos.
So why the unnecessary move to cut our offensive missile deterrent force after the administration has scrapped Phase IV of our European-based missile defense, which was the proposed replacement for the ground-based interceptors and missile radars that were scuttled in a betrayal of our Polish and Czech allies?
The president has said he dreams of a world without nuclear weapons, which critics point out seems to mean only a world without U.S. nukes.
He sees U.S. military supremacy as an anachronistic example of the American exceptionalism for which he has apologized so many times.
To that end, in his June 2013 Berlin speech, President Obama spoke of his desire to unilaterally reduce deployed U.S. nuclear forces by up to one-third.
Never mind his promises to U.S. lawmakers that he would maintain a strong land-based ICBM force, a promise he made to garner votes for ratification of the New START Treaty.
Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester, both Democrats from Montana, home of many ICBMs, issued a press release in 2010 backing New START and saying the missiles would "continue to play a key role in U.S. national security for decades to come."
Read the full story here.
Obama: Reallocate Defense Resources to Foreign Aid
February 9, 2015
President Obama says the United States should reallocate defense resources to foreign aid efforts. He also added that most Americans misunderstand how much of the federal budget goes to diplomacy.
"
f you look at our foreign assistance as a tool in our national security portfolio, as opposed to charity, and you combine our defense budget with our diplomatic budget and our foreign assistance budget, then in that mix there's a lot more that we should be doing when it comes to helping Honduras and Guatemala build an effective criminal-justice system, effective police, and economic development that creates jobs," Obama said in an interview with Vox.com, a liberal news site.
"So you're saying it would make sense to reallocate those resources?" asks Matthew Yglesias of Vox.com.
"Well, and part of the challenge here is just public awareness. Time and time again, when they do surveys, and they ask people what proportion of the foreign budget is spent on foreign aid, they'll say, '25 percent.' They're pretty sure all their hard-earned money that they pay in taxes is somehow going to other folks. And if we can say, it varies between 1-2 percent depending on how you define it," Obama responds. "And if we were to make some strategic investments in countries that really could use our help, we would then not have to deploy our military as often and we would be in a better position to work with other countries to stand down violent extremism."
Watch the video of the exchange below:
General: Strategic Military Satellites Vulnerable to Attack in Future Space War
Military studying new system of smaller, survivable satellites
Follow @FreeBeacon
Gen. William Shelton, Commander, U.S. Air Force Space Command / AP
BY: Bill Gertz Follow @BillGertz
January 8, 2014 4:59 am
U.S. strategic military satellites are vulnerable to attack in a future space war and the Pentagon is considering a major shift to smaller satellites in response, the commander of the Air Force Space Command said Tuesday.
Gen. William Shelton said in a speech that China currently has a missile that can destroy U.S. satellites and warned that the threat of both space weapons and high-speed orbiting debris is growing.
The threat of attack to large communications and intelligence satellites is prompting a major study on whether to diversify the current satellite arsenal of scores of orbiters.
The four-star general also said he is wary of the United States joining an international code of conduct for space, an initiative promoted by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The code likely would constrain the United States freedom of action in the increasingly contested realm of space, he said during remarks at George Washington University.
Over the past several decades, satellites have revolutionized war fighting and caused a shift in the character of military forces from large ground armies to forces that emphasize agility and speed.
Shelton said the United States; highest priority military satellites are those that provide survivable communications and missile warning. Current systems cost about $1 billion each.
If any of these critical satellites are attacked and destroyed in a conflict or crisis, the loss would create a huge hole in our capability to conduct modern, high-tech warfare, Shelton said.
Space has become contested in all orbits, where we face a host of man-made threats that may deny, degrade, or disrupt our capabilities, Shelton said, noting electronic jamming, laser attacks and direct attack weapons, which are all systems being developed by Chinas military.
Jamming satellites is a cheap and effective way of blocking our signals from space and lasers can blind our imaging systems, and in the future, they could prove destructive to our satellites, he said.
Direct attack weapons, like the Chinese anti-satellite system, can destroy our space systems, Shelton said.
Chinas successful landing of a robot rover on the moon last month revealed an aggressive Chinese space program, Shelton said.
China is also building anti-satellite weapons that range from ground-launched missiles that destroy orbiting satellites, ground-based lasers, electronic jammers, and cyber attacks, according to defense officials.
The latest annual report of the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission stated that China recently conducted a test of a high-earth orbit anti-satellite missile.
The test signaled Chinas intent to develop an [anti-satellite] capability to target satellites in an altitude range that includes U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS) and many U.S. military and intelligence satellites, the report said. The Free Beacon first reported the test.
Defense officials also disclosed in January 2013 that China launched three small maneuvering satellites as part of its ASAT program, including one with a robotic arm that can be used to capture or destroy orbiting satellites…
