Obama disarmament = megadeath

No, I'm not necessarily talking about the metal band, whose frontman Dave Mustaine expressed his support for Rick Santorum earlier Wednesday; although, some of their post-apocalyptic tunes of nuclear holocaust forebode desperate reflections of perhaps the dangerous reelection game Obama is playing with our nuclear arsenal. And the band's namesake (changed by a single letter) is a risk that I for one don't wish to leave up to chance with the Obama administration. Tuesday night, the Associated Press caught wind of this chilling symphony of destruction:

The Obama administration is weighing options for sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons, The Associated Press has learned.

No final decision has been made, but the administration is considering at least three options for lower total numbers of deployed strategic nuclear weapons cutting to around 1,000 to 1,100, 700 to 800, or 300 to 400, according to a former government official and a congressional staffer.

The potential cuts would be from a current treaty limit of 1,550 deployed strategic warheads.

Rush helped put this staggering premonition into perspective Wednesday morning:

Meanwhile, the Iranians are nuking up. Iran announced today that they're gonna cut off oil to six countries that have opposed its nuclear program, and more importantly, Iran also announced that they have installed domestically made nuclear fuel rods in their Tehran reactor.

They're nuking up, while we're disarming? Folks, that's not only scary, that's stupid.

The left has never understood this about military matters and defense. They never understood this about nukes. You build them so that you don't have to use them. That's the point. You don't build them because you want to. You don't build them because you can't wait to use them. You don't build them because you're warmongers. You build them so that you don't have to. It's what's behind practically every major weapon invention and manufacture.

The hope is that the brute force and the ability to project power is enough to deter anybody from taking us on. It's a great strategy, it is how this stuff works, and now Barack Obama is reducing our stockpile unilaterally by 80%, back to 300 warheads. Now, you might say, "Well, that's good, Rush, it's making the world safer." It is not making the world safer. If the Russians still have 15,000 or 2,000, whatever the number is, folks, there's a balance of power here that has shifted away from us, and this -- I am here to tell you -- is by design.

This would amount to unilateral disarmament. Three hundred nuclear weapons would take us back to levels not seen since 1950. If we cut our nuclear weapons down to 300, Russia will have five times, 1,550 nuclear warheads. If we reduce to 300, we will have fewer nuclear warheads than the ChiComs. The only thing you could say in response to this, "Well, Rush, we don't have anything to fear from the Russians or the Chinese or anybody in the Middle East." No, of course we don't.

In 1967, we peaked at 31,255 nuclear warheads. In 1989, we were down to 22,217 warheads. In 2010, we were at 5,113 nuclear warheads. And by 2017 we are scheduled to be at 1,500 warheads -- 1,550. It is that number Obama is suggesting be reduced to 300 warheads -- and before 2017.

Remaking America...beneath the might of foreign lands and resurrecting the fear of a megadeath. Bad idea, Mr. President. It's not only a naive policy, but a significantly flawed reelection tactic.