Obama's National Security Fraud; the President Endangers Americans by Failing to Maintain a Minimum Nuclear Deterrence
Byline: Frank Gaffney Jr., THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Andrew C. McCarthy is a highly accomplished former federal prosecutor and indisputably one of the most formidable legal minds of our time. On Sunday, he persuasively made the case at National Review Online that President Obama has engaged in criminal fraud with his deliberately deceptive promises about Americans being able to retain their health insurance policies.
Added to a bill of particulars of high crimes and misdemeanors might be growing evidence that beyond this fraud (which, as Mr. McCarthy notes, would have criminal penalties associated with it), is an even more malign intent: to destroy the private health care insurance industry in favor of Mr. Obama's preferred outcome - a single-payer (read, government-run) system.
It is predictable that some people will die as a result of this fraud and the legislation it helped enact. What is even more certain, however, is that large numbers of Americans are at risk as a result of the national security fraud in which Mr. Obama and his administration have also serially engaged.
Examples abound and will be discussed in future columns. Let's start with one that is exceedingly topical at a moment when Team Obama is negotiating a deal with Iran that will allow Tehran to complete its decades-long effort to acquire threatening nuclear weapons: the accelerating hollowing-out of the U.S. nuclear deterrent.
Two meetings last week laid out the gravity of the situation. The first was an off-the-record event sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy to discuss an important new book, Minimal Deterrence: Examining the Evidence. The authors, led by James Schlesinger, a former secretary of the departments of Defense and Energy, constitute a who's who of national security professionals with deep, firsthand experience with deterrence strategy and the U.S. forces needed to make it work.
The evidence examined in Minimal Deterrence makes one thing abundantly clear: There is no basis for thinking that we will be safer if the United States adopts the sort of posture Mr. Obama promises - namely, one relying on far fewer nuclear arms - en route to what he fraudulently promises can be achieved, a world without nuclear weapons.
As Mr. Schlesinger and company put it: The problem with minimum deterrence is not only that it rests on false, implausible or self-contradictory claims. More important is the fact that its recommended deep force reductions, no 'new' U.S. nuclear capabilities, and application of U.S. nuclear deterrence only to opponents' nuclear threats ... would likely undermine the U.S. capacity to deter opponents and assure allies.
The fraudulent nature of Mr. Obama's assurances about our security, in light of the deep reductions he is making in our arsenal, is further compounded by an unhappy fact: Whatever will be left of it, until such time as the planet somehow becomes nuclear-free, is inexorably becoming less and less credible as a deterrent. …