Holy Cow!! President Obama's Biggest Lie To Date?

Only three months into his presidency, Barack Obama said in April 2009 that he envisioned an Earth in the future fee of nuclear weapons. Just two years later, however, America’s arsenal of those warheads amounts to roughly 2,500 nukes ready to be deployed.

As the US vows to cut down its arsenal of nuclear weapons, the cost the country spends annually on maintaining its supply is much more than America invested each year during the Cold War. Estimates suggest that currently the US puts around $55 billion annually into its nuclear weapons program, reports Mother Jones; by comparison, the cost of the nuke complex for the country during the Cold War ran at an average of only $35 billion each year.

www.globalresearch.ca...

This is a MASSIVE LIE!
He got so much support after saying he would cut down and dismantle some warheads
But look at the numbers, Is this one of Obama's biggest lie to date?

Under the START treaty that the US signed with Russia last year, both countries vow to soon enough limit their stash of active warheads to only 1,500. The document does not, however, say how many back-up nukes either country can have.

The same facilities that dismantle U.S. nuclear warheads are also refurbishing US warheads," Cirincione adds to NPR. "And right now a decision has been made to prioritize refurbishment. So we're actually building more nuclear weapons than we're dismantling. That didn't use to be the case, but it is now."

Well how clever

It's amazing to see not only how much propoganda comes out of the white house but also newstitutes, how come I haven't heard any of this on mainstream news?

This is ridiculous!
And you know what? This is not just a shot at Obama despite the thread title, even conservative mainstream news have not reported this and I judge them for that!

Unbelievable, share this with as many people as you can
Ridiculous!

The real numbers are classified. Treaties mean nothing. Who knows what we built or dismantled. There could be zero nukes or 30 times what is reported.

I think the biggest lie was taking an oath to defend against domestic enemies.

But what do I know.

Peace

reply to post by ModernAcademia

I dont see a lie here at all. The figures you mention talk about "maintaining" nuclear weapons. Nothing is mentioned about the actual creation of new nuclear weapons. Find that and then its a lie. Oh and the obvious one...it wasnt a promise or goal....lol

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Only three months into his presidency, Barack Obama said in April 2009 that he envisioned an Earth in the future fee of nuclear weapons. Just two years later, however, America’s arsenal of those warheads amounts to roughly 2,500 nukes ready to be deployed.

www.globalresearch.ca...

This is a MASSIVE LIE!
He got so much support after saying he would cut down and dismantle some warheads
But look at the numbers, Is this one of Obama's biggest lie to date?

The man said he envisioned a world free of nuclear weapons.

He didn't promise it would happen

Besides we should keep our nuclear capability, we may have to use them one day.

He just said he envisioned it. He didn't promise. It's a pretty big lie but not his biggest.

I do not see a connection between what he told you he envisioned and the further deployment of nuclear war bombs as of today. Its all bad conjecture to use it as a case against. On this specific thing he cannot be held in guilty of lying. President Obama is just a frontman for the shadow government and is too a victim to deception.

Perhaps some of you need to refresh your memories


Look here
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Read the comments

Obama is spitting propoganda!

You can't say you will form a treaty with Russia but with loopholes.
You can't say you envision less nuclear weapons while increasing them in your term

You are philosophically taking accountability out of his hands by being apologists.
It is propoganda!

The rest of the world arms and we disarm the dude is a moron we use to have 10,000 and now?

That is treason considering the hatred and animosity and the nonstop actions of those who want the bomb.

NO the simple fact there has not been 1 new nuke built in the us since reagan now if that arsenal was moderinized the cost would be cheaper in the long rong.

Do people really think build a nuke and it will last forever? hell no it doesn't God forbid we get attacked by someone and there your arsenal is make back in the 50s.

sheer stupidity.

Originally posted by neo96

The rest of the world arms and we disarm the dude is a moron we use to have 10,000 and now?

That is treason considering the hatred and animosity and the nonstop actions of those who want the bomb.

NO the simple fact there has not been 1 new nuke built in the us since reagan now if that arsenal was moderinized the cost would be cheaper in the long rong.

Do people really think build a nuke and it will last forever? hell no it doesn't God forbid we get attacked by someone and there your arsenal is make back in the 50s.

sheer stupidity.

If the old ones are going bad, we should either use them or build some new ones.

Anyways I don't think they are so concerned about a rogue nation anymore as they are about a rogue insurgency group.

reply to post by neo96


The only sheer stupidity is anyone having nukes in the first place.
How does hurting people with a bomb that damages for decades make any sense.
We're going to end up nuking our species out of existance and severly damaging the planet in the process.
Sheer stupidity.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


So now Obama's critics are all for nuclear disarmament? They don't mind a nuke gap with the "ruskies"

Is this Oz? where's the lollipop guild?

I mean hey.. .welcome aboard guys. But... you know this wasn't really your "thing" until Obama, you know? Are you going to stick with this position, or will it flop back to favoring nuclear stockpiling if we get a president from Option B?

reply to post by neo96


Tell me, Neo. What's your happy, smiling explanation for your craving to annihilate millions - billions of people with over ten thousand nukes?

reply to post by ModernAcademia


I know it's not the point but isn't 35billion coldwar dollars about the same as 55billion today dollars? It just bothers me that the article makes it sound like we are spending more than we did before.

Obama has lied damn near about everything except for waging war in the Middle East.

Oh, he didn't lie about change either. He definitely helped to change things from bad to worse.

2,500 now compared to a helluva lot more then that is a sign of a drawdown however we will bottom at roughly 500 to remain strong. Besides, nukes are sooo yesterday!

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


10,000 nukes is more then sufficient to wipe planet Earth clean out of existance as we know it. Hence the drawdown!

Originally posted by InformationAccount


The man said he envisioned a world free of nuclear weapons.

He didn't promise it would happen

Besides we should keep our nuclear capability, we may have to use them one day.

I actually agree with you on this point, however with that being said what right does the US have to tell other nations they can not do the same thing as we have done or are currently doing?

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


The need to stockpile or not is not the question
This is not about the importance of nukes, it's about him prentending to be a representative or world peace

He doens't want to dismantle nukes, okay don't
But then do not try to gather so much support from the left and the world by saying you will while doing the opposite

The imporantance of nukes is not the issue here, it's his dishonesty

I am astounded by the people who really can not identify a lie or treason. In my day, ok I'm old, accusing anyone of lying was pretty strong stuff and you damn well needed to have some proof.

It is a shame that these accusations come so easily to so many. Yeah I'm lookin at you guys.