Trump admin to withdraw from INF nuclear arms treaty with Russia


This’ll calm things down :laughing:.

Tom Nichols, a professor at the Naval war college, gives a good breakdown of what it means here:

Essentially, there is no real reason for these weapons to exist at the moment, the only thing they do is unnecessarily raise risks with no upside for the US.

But Trump likes nukes. And Bolton hates treaties. So here we go!


Can he back out of it without Congress? I thought he couldnt



While it takes the advise and consent of the Senate to sign a treaty, the constitution says nothing about leaving one.

Congress could simply cut the funding to the missiles Trump wants to build here, but i’ll believe it when I see it.

He’s already had so called “tactical” nukes designed (half the yield of Hiroshima), they’re on track to be finished by the end of the fiscal year, and Congress hasn’t bothered to stop him so…


Wouldn’t he need the house as well?


Congress has given away to much power to the executive branch. The one thing a sitting President has is huge power at their disposal in foreign policy.


As long as your potential enemies have such weapons there will be a reason to maintain them.

As long as your potential enemies are upgrading theirs, you have a reason to keep upgrading yours.


No. There is no constitutional requirement for congress to approve withdrawal from any treaty.


He? We’ve been working on low yield tactical nukes since the 50’s.

The designers just have to pull out existing plans and adapt them to whatever delivery system is chosen.


The Constitution gives this power to the POTUS, not congress.


Yep as far as I know that was passed in 1973 (War Powers Act). And imho is has been abused from Kosovo to Libya to name a few which bypassed Congress. I am not saying the presidents doesn’t have the power to act without congress, just that maybe the law itself should be be scrapped and congress should vote.

You are a military man wasn’t that law passed to give the president the power to go to war if something major happened like for instance in case of a nuclear war and the response had to be immediate. It just seems Kosovo and Libya didn’t fit that description.


so you want another cold war?


might as well throw out the non-proliferation agreement at this point and just start a free for all.


I think its time for Canada to ditch the NPA and build their own nuclear weapons.


Bush tried to have the so called “nuclear earth penetrator” weapon developed and Congress shot him down on a bipartisan basis. He tried again a year later to have mixed yield warheads on tridents and was shot down again.

Because it’s a really ■■■■■■■ stupid idea. Nukes are to ensure MAD, to prevent warfare.

Low-yield nukes are a temptation to be used in battle, since some idiots are of the mindset that “They won’t mind if we use them”. They risk a nuclear war far more than a high yield warhead does.

You have 4,000 nukes. There is no deterrence gap, you can already ensure MAD several times over.

The idea that the US needs these low-yield weapons to respond to the Russians using them against you is insane. They are not a form of escalation control, there is no controlling or limiting nuclear war.


From what I understand, this has been a long time coming and Europe supports it.


I dont understand what the consequences are for Russia with this. Basically, are they just going to start building new weapons/missiles now? Are there plans for the US to ramp up missile production?


Poots says, “Thanks Donny!”


Dumpster Donnie probably got a really good performance review in his recent meeting with Putin. Guess we’ll never know for sure though, as note takers weren’t allowed in the meeting.


Wait wait wait, the one that canned by intermediate range ballistic missiles? The deal Reagan and Gorbachev cut that opened the floodgates of glasnost and perestroika and eventually led to the end of the Cold War?

Jesus tap-dancing Christ, why?


Neither America nor Russia has nuclear IRBMs. This feels like a political copypasta.