Do the people of the United States really believe...?

Question

that if Barack Obama was elected president he would make the country a safer place by disarming our nuclear weapons, even though there is no country in the world that would follow suit regardless of the action WE take?

Answer 1

Taking away our weapons is the worst thing a President could do! Whether it's nuclear or just firearms. Our weapons are our defense against foreign and domestic enemies.

George Washington-

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.”

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.”

James Madison-

The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

Thomas Jefferson-

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Patrick Henry-

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?”

Abraham Lincoln-

" I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts."

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”

"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for that is the only safeguard of our liberties."

Answer 2

It doesn't matter.

Nuclear weapons are the most powerful weapon known to man.  

But they can only be loaded onto ICBMs (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles--or equivalent).  Now ICBMs can travel at about 18,000 miles per hour.  

Sounds fast, until you find out that the missiles sent to intercept them can travel at just under 186,000 miles per second (not per hour, per second--just under the speed of light).

So while nuclear weapons are powerful, they are too slow to actually make it.  What good is having a power punch if you can't land the hit?

Nuclear weapons are outdated as a major battlefield weapon.  So Obama can disarm all of them, and we are none the worse for it.  And that is true whether other countries follow suit or not.

Add-on:

They absolutely do go that fast.  Not quite the speed of light, but nearly so.  

And you are still missing the point.  Its the speed of the ICBMs, which are too slow for combat.  Most missiles can outrun them now; especially the intercepting missiles.  

They WILL be taken out before they have a chance to hit us.

Answer 3

Right, a superpower with no nukes -- while other countries are trying to get them.  Obama is frightening.  That should worry even our allies.

Answer 4

I believe he would make an effort, but I don't think it would make too big a difference to sway other countries to "follow our footsteps."

I don't think it would go through either.

I only like him compared to McCain...just like Bush vs Kerry I only like Bush better because I didn't like Kerry

Answer 5

To be honest?

I think that Obama will do absolutely nothing beneficial to our country when he gets into office.

Answer 6

honestly i think all the people running suck.

(I already know i'm going to get a bunch of thumbs down for that but ohwell , my opinion)

and nuclear weapons are useless anyways.

Answer 7

I think we'll be safer not going to war.

Nukes haven't topped my concern list for quite a while now.

PACIFIST WARMONGER: NO MISSILE INTERCEPTOR GOES THAT FAST PLEASE STOP LYING TO THESE NICE PEOPLE.

Answer 8

i think he should OFFER to do it on the condition other countries do it too. I don't think he should actually do it until then

Answer 9

Personally,I believe there is no safety after

9/11. Withdrawing the troops from Iraq is a higher priority than nuclear weapons,but reducing the nukes would be a step in the right direction. I would like to live in a world where there was an international agreement prohibiting all nuclear weapons,but I suppose that's as unlikely as world peace.

Unfortunately,nukes are a fact of life until the next advanced weapon comes along.

Answer 10

Unilateral disarmament of any part of a national defense system, does not make sense. The MAD was a concept that prevented a nuclear confrontation during the 60's. The world is not ready for the U.S. to step out and do this. It's no different than how our enemies would view our President.  McCain would be a deterrent because they know he's not afraid of a confrontation. Obama is seen as weak, inexperienced, indecisive, insecure and more probable to "compromise" with an enemy.