Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. We believe that citizens have a voice - one that should be heard above the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

5 thoughts on “Stupid Senators Suckered By Obama On Nuke Deterrence

  1. Jon Davis

    Actually reducing to 400 icbms is a smart strategy. This will allow us to deploy 12 Ohio subs with 20 slbms each for a total of 240. Then we can also deploy 60 nuclear capable bombers. This brings us to the 700 limit for deployed delivery vehicles under New START. Furthermore, we could retain all of our Ohio slbm tubes and keep 96 in a non-deployed status and 4 more non-deployed nuclear bombers to bring us to the 800 deployed and non-deployed delivery vehicles. I think this is much better than keeping too many icbms. Slbms are much more valuable than icbms, we can deploy 8 – 12 mirvs on slbms vs. 1 – 3 mirvs on icbms. And subs are much more survivable than icbms. And icbms are really only useful against Russia or China. I could go on and on.

  2. Jan Brown

    There is no doubt that our defense system would have a huge void without our Marines as part of the team. They do, indeed, do a lot of the heavy lifting..just as do member in all of our Military Branches..And, .on the other hand, without good analyses & logistical planning & product development, they wouldn’t be able to do such outstanding work….and it’s true that many who haven’t ‘worn the uniform’ do, in fact, contribute and SERVE our Nation with honor….(.Zbigniew’s website offers evidence of this..) While I truly admire & find joy in the personal pride of our fighting men & women of today & yesterday, we must be mindful that no one branch or division is an island unto itself. We need all the working parts to do our jobs. Sempre fi

  3. David S Lewis

    Your story on the US Marine Corps.
    Since the comments section is closed I felt it important to post on how wrong you are on the Marines and how little understanding you have.

    The Marine Corps shall be organized, trained, and equipped to provide fleet marine forces of combined arms, together with supporting air components, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases and for the conduct of such land operations as may be essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign.

    What the are not is a special forces quick reactionary force. The Marine Corps leadership however has pushed that BS agenda in order to keep funding and manpower.

    As Truman said “They have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin’s.”

    Do we need a marine corps? Yes do we need 200,000 no, 174,000 no.
    Nice try though

    1. Zbigniew Mazurak Post author

      The Marine Corps is needed as a middleweight, 911 force that can respond to any aggression in size and with significant combat power – on land, in the air, and at sea – and can do so very quickly, can be quickly shipped to any theater by the Navy, and can be continually resupplied from the sea or the air. Only the Marines can do that. Also, the Marines are far, far better trained, educated, and physically tougher, and more innovative, than the Army.

      1. David S Lewis

        The Marine Corps “far, far better trained, educated, and physically tougher, and more innovative, than the Army.” is highly debatable especially coming from some one who has never worn the uniform.

        As Truman said “They have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin’s.”

Comments are closed.