Cain on China: “They’re trying to develop nuclear capability”; Update: Cain getting a bad rap?

posted at 9:05 pm on November 1, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Ace, skip ahead to 11:30 or so for the key bit. The quote:

HERMAN CAIN: I do view China as a potential military threat to the United States.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And what could you do as president to head that off?

HERMAN CAIN: My China strategy is quite simply outgrow China. It gets back to economics. China has a $6 trillion economy and they’re growing at approximately 10 percent. We have a $14 trillion economy — much bigger — but we’re growing at an anemic 1.5, 1.6 percent. When we get our economy growing back at the rate of 5 or 6 percent that it has the ability to do, we will outgrow China.

And secondly, we already have superiority in terms of our military capability, and I plan to get away from making cutting our defense a priority and make investing in our military capability a priority, going back to my statement: peace through strength and clarity. So yes they’re a military threat. They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have. So yes, we have to consider them a military threat.

The phrasing’s slightly ambiguous so it becomes a rorschach test on Cain. If you like him and trust that he has a grasp on policy, you’ll think he’s referring here to developing nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The Pentagon’s chief worry right now is China building any sort of carrier, not necessarily a nuclear one, so this would be an odd bit of specificity from Cain. But fair enough — a Chinese nuclear carrier would indeed be a big deal. If you don’t like him and/or don’t trust him on policy, you’ll think he’s referring here to China developing a general nuclear capability, i.e. nuclear weapons. Which, as pretty much everyone in the world except maybe him knows, they’ve already had for decades. The way the sentence is phrased, with the two parts separated by “and,” it sounds like he’s distinguishing the nuclear component conceptually from the carriers. Could a guy who didn’t know what the “right of return” was and who whiffed on the biggest softball question ever about Gitmo really not know that China has a nuclear deterrent? I’m thinking … maybe. Although it won’t be spun that way tomorrow, needless to say.

The fact that we’re about to have a debate in the comments about whether he knows China has nukes doesn’t bode well for the general election campaign against Obama.

Watch Cain Confident He Can Win Nomination, Says Harassment Claims Are ‘Baseless’ on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Update: I didn’t see it last night, but here’s what commenter Jason Coleman had to say about Cain’s background with China and nukes:

Herman Cain spent the Vietnam war evaluating the capabilities of the Chinese to deliver a nuclear weapon onto the heads of our forces in South Vietnam.

He examined the test launches of the Dongfeng 1 (SS-1) and plotted out the trajectories for a 500kg warheads.

When China started testing the Dongfeng 2 (CSS-1) Cain plotted out the trajectories and capabilities of it’s delivery of 15 kiloton nuclear weapons.

Both of these missiles were provided to the PRC by the Soviets, Cain analysed data from the Russian test launches and determined the risk to U.S. troops in SE Asia.

Cain also observed the development of China’s first domestically produced missile, Dongfeng 3 (CSS-2) and plotted out it’s use with China’s 15-20KT fissile devices as well as China’s new thermonuclear devices.

Finally, Cain was involved in the determination that China’s Dongfeng 4 (CSS-3) was capable of delivering both fissile and thermonuclear devices to both Moscow and Guam as well as cover the entire deployment of U.S. forces in SE Asia.

Cain is well aware of China’s nuclear missile capability, the only reasonable conclusion is that Cain was indeed referring to China’s attempts to develop and sail their first nuclear aircraft carrier and their attempts to develop more dangerous nuclear cruisers.

I would have broken this out into a separate post except that, after googling, I can’t find anything to confirm Coleman’s claims that Cain spent time on Chinese nukes while he worked on ballistics in the Navy. I e-mailed Coleman to ask for his source but haven’t heard back. He mentioned in another comment last night that some of this is in Cain’s book; I haven’t read it yet but anyone who has is welcome to confirm or deny. Cain’s website says of his time working for the Navy, “Herman continued his education by earning his Master’s degree in computer science from Purdue University while working full-time developing fire control systems for ships and fighter planes for the Department of the Navy,” but Coleman claimed in his second comment that that description is incomplete. If so, I’m surprised Cain hasn’t talked more about his Navy work as a foreign-policy credential. We’ve heard endlessly about Pillsbury and Godfather’s Pizza, but the only time I remember him talking at any length about his Navy work was when Lawrence O’Donnell tried to demagogue him for being some sort of draft dodger. (He told O’Donnell he worked on a “rocket-assisted projectile.”) In any case, there’s at least some reason to doubt the theory that Cain didn’t know about China’s nuke stockpile. Duly noted.

Update: Jason Coleman e-mails to say that some of the details he provided are in Cain’s book, some have been gleaned from bits of info dropped by Cain on the trail, and some he knows from chatting with Cain’s former colleagues. He has no online links to point me too (Cain’s work for the Navy long predated the Internet, obviously) but will send them along if he finds any.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6

Boy, there are a lot of Perry haters on here! What are you going to do if he happens to win it all?? and dont say he won’t -just looka the example of John Mccain winning.
Let’s slam obama I say.

Bullhead on November 2, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Good times.

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 12:03 AM

Well I am glad you are enjoying this.

Difference of opinion I guess.

sharrukin on November 2, 2011 at 12:07 AM

What he meant, I think, is what’s been in the news about China, that they’re trying to modernize their nuclear weapons. To upgrade the primitive decades old warheads to modern ones. That’s my assumption.

Like, you can’t read the full paragraph before and after that half sentence, and think that he doesn’t know what he’s saying. Vague phrasing is his ‘sin’ in this modern beast of sound bites.

AlexB on November 2, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Bullhead on November 2, 2011 at 12:04 AM

That’s unlikely, as McCain owed his victory to the winner-take-all GOP primary that has been changed this year by party folks who don’t want it to happen again.

The real question is, when Cain comes to your state as the only candidate who still has a realistic shot to pass Romney, whom are you going to vote for?

Not saying there’s a right or a wrong choice for you, just saying it’s much more likely you’ll have to face it than anyone will have to think twice about Perry.

HitNRun on November 2, 2011 at 12:10 AM

How about a retraction AP? But I won’t hold my breath.

Knucklehead on November 2, 2011 at 12:03 AM

First you’re whining about how Ace treated SP and now you’re accusing AP of bias against your chosen one.
Are you sure you’re not really promachus?
You sound an awful lot like him.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 12:13 AM

This post is pathetic. I find it hard to believe anyone really believes Cain is unaware of China’s nuclear capability. I’m not sure if AP posts this trash for hits, or he is just plain intellectually dishonest. I’m also not sure which is worse, but the eleven pictures of Cain on the front page make me lean toward the hits theory. It reminds me of the height of Palinmania. HA posted every single rumor and outright lie the MSM was selling on any given day, and there was no shortage of “conservatives” here to eat it up.

I’m not sold on Cain. I was never sold on Palin. I do believe they are both good people, and they deserve the benefit of the doubt on the close calls. This one isn’t even close. If you believe Cain doesn’t know China has nukes, I dare say you are the stupid one.

thebriand on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 AM

They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have.

What would make Chinese aircraft carriers more like the ones we have? Nuclear capability. I have no doubt that’s what he was talking about, he just got the topic of the sentence a little jumbled.

Look at the way he talks about China’s plans, too. China’s interest in nuclear aircraft carriers has been in the news for at least the last year. I’m pretty sure there haven’t been any stories he could have read where China indicated an interest in developing general nuclear capability (which they already have). Which is he most likely talking about, then, when he refers to China’s nuclear intentions?

Give the man a little credit. The rest of his answer is reasonable and well-informed. It’s hard to believe he knows things like the size of China’s economy (in dollars) and how fast it’s growing, but not something as simple as which countries are in the nuclear club.

RightOFLeft on November 2, 2011 at 12:17 AM

I listened and you’re absolutely right.

How about a retraction AP? But I won’t hold my breath.

Knucklehead on November 2, 2011 at 12:03 AM

Won’t happen. The stupid is strong on this thread. Only option left is to dig deeper.

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 12:17 AM

“Nuke capability in aircraft carriers. As for technology leaps in other things like rocket guidance, nuclear power generation, computers etc; thank pappy bush, Clinton, Dubya and Oboobi.

AH_C on November 2, 2011 at 12:20 AM

If you like him and trust that he has a grasp on policy, you’ll think he’s referring here to developing nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The Pentagon’s chief worry right now is China building any sort of carrier, not necessarily a nuclear one, so this would be an odd bit of specificity from Cain. But fair enough — a Chinese nuclear carrier would indeed be a big deal.

My take on it was that he was referring to them developing a nuclear capability in their navy, not necessarrily an aircraft carrier. Understand that a modern blue water navy has to be all nuclear. If part is and part aint, then it all aint, becuase of refueling limitations.
I’m sorry but I just dont think this man is as stupid as what is implied.
The recently bought a russian vstol carrier, and while interesting, it isnt a blue water threat except to a few carribean and pacific islands, and that tub aint nuclear either.

paulsur on November 2, 2011 at 12:21 AM

First you’re whining about how Ace treated SP and now you’re accusing AP of bias against your chosen one.
Are you sure you’re not really promachus?
You sound an awful lot like him.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 12:13 AM

You and Aslan’girl are slowly morphin into Jenfidels.

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Haven’t read through the comments so maybe someone already said this, but I predict a clarification tomorrow that doesn’t clarify anything, then a clarification about the clarification, then a clarification about the clarification about the clarification. And then everyone will be happy because it’ll be all cleared up.

OneGyT on November 2, 2011 at 12:24 AM

When I think of a major knowledge fail, I think of Bachmann breathlessly repeating a decades old urban legend about vaccines.

HitNRun on November 1, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Which is a relatively unimportant issue facing our nation that almost nobody should pay much attention to considering the far more important matters pressing down on our nation, including life and death foreign policy issues that affect us all. In that Regard Bachmann and Newt are the real front runners.

FloatingRock on November 2, 2011 at 12:26 AM

Haven’t read through the comments so maybe someone already said this, but I predict a clarification tomorrow that doesn’t clarify anything, then a clarification about the clarification, then a clarification about the clarification about the clarification. And then everyone will be happy because it’ll be all cleared up.

OneGyT on November 2, 2011 at 12:24 AM

Ironically, that is the only valid criticism of Cain in this otherwise useless post. I sometimes think he’s trying to assume the typical front-runner, play-it-safe, role … always talk in the abstract, be vague, etc. Instead, it just makes him look indecisive, which is the exact OPPOSITE of the Cain we grew to love when he was running behind. He just needs to get back to his old self and say it like it is and to hell with the rest.

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Possible 1: he meant developing their Chicom nuclear capability further.

Possible 2: he is unaware they have nukes.

Any evidence he has talked about China’s nukes before? That would substantiate 1.

No evidence he has done so leaves open 2. In which case, Oh Jesus!

AshleyTKing on November 2, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Are you sure you’re not really promachus?
You sound an awful lot like him.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 12:13 AM

And you’ve become an annoying little distraction. Stop stalking me and please ignore me.

Knucklehead on November 2, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Why should the Chinese need any sort of military capability anyway? It’s not like they’ve ever been attacked.

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 12:40 AM

I’ve got a dancing bear that I’m going to run in the early primaries to see if he catches traction. He can’t be any worse.

DFCtomm on November 2, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Why should the Chinese need any sort of military capability anyway? It’s not like they’ve ever been attacked.

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 12:40 AM

China is the bully on the block. Who threatens them today? Mongolia?

AshleyTKing on November 2, 2011 at 12:49 AM

Gee , maybe we should go by his actual statement which does NOT say China lacks any nukes.

Stop making things up because you just make yourself look Romney desperate.

LeeSeneca on November 2, 2011 at 12:50 AM

Just listen to the video from around 11:50. The transcript says “They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability AND that …” but he clearly says “They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability IN that …”.

MisterPundit on November 1, 2011 at 11:50 PM

That seems plausible. He may have been about to say something like,
“They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability in their aircraft carriers, like we have.”, but changed stride in mid sentence.

FloatingRock on November 2, 2011 at 12:51 AM

China is the bully on the block. Who threatens them today? Mongolia?

AshleyTKing on November 2, 2011 at 12:49 AM

Right. And who threatens America today? Canada?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 12:52 AM

Have those myself, but then I remember that whatever is going to happen will happen. By the time I vote in Texas the primary is settled, Ill have very little say, so at least I get to say what I want here, just glad the Hot Air folks let the Romney people at least say something. A lot of conservative blogs now dont, so kudos to them for that.

nswider on November 1, 2011 at 9:34 PM

I have to say that I appreciate you for supporting your candidate and not just beating other candidates to a pulp. I may not agree with your choice of Romney, but I will hear you as long as you have something reasonable to say, and don’t insult me while you say it.

tmontgomery on November 2, 2011 at 12:54 AM

Right. And who threatens America today? Canada?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 12:52 AM

Beats me?

sharrukin on November 2, 2011 at 12:55 AM

Right. And who threatens America today? Canada?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 12:52 AM

Only on the hockey rink. Nice clips of Lujiazui, by the way.

AshleyTKing on November 2, 2011 at 12:58 AM

sharrukin on November 2, 2011 at 12:55 AM

A shared threat, no doubt.

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Allah. That is exactly what he meant and you know it. Spend less time with Ace. OK?

katy the mean old lady on November 1, 2011 at 9:08 PM

Bwahahahaha!!!!

Let me guess, former St Palin the Victimized supporter right?

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 1:01 AM

Oh yeah, China is going end up with Nukes on ships.

Translation : they’ll have nuclear powered aircraft carriers and more.

Translation : if the US doesn’t figure out cheap easily repeatable assembly line nuclear power plants (aka if the US doesn’t figure a way around Green stupidity), China could perhaps force us to buy their nuke power plants because we are soooo in debt to them that pretty soon we’ll be their puppet and we are soooo clueless about how to properly and aggressively develop nuclear power, including, but not limited to well proven power plants that our military has operated for decades.

Fine print, if nuclear power becomes more and more popular, there will be less material available to redirect to weapons… The fewer nuclear power plants there are around the world, the more room for mischief (weapons)…

drfredc on November 2, 2011 at 1:03 AM

Uh-oh. Who’s that Grecian president, again?

Yeah, yeah. This was hardly a gotcha question or a discussion of minutiae. I would expect a presidential candidate to speak as if he knows China has had nukes for a long time.

Cain’s not my first choice, but that’s not because I think he would imperil the United States through not knowing the status of China’s nuclear forces. (He literally couldn’t. Too many failsafes and checks and balances.) He gave the important answer correctly, in my view: the way to address the problem of China is to outgrow China. Reassert the economic leadership of liberty.

We pay thousands of analysts and mid-level managers to know who’s got what nukes; Cain can get a brief any time. But you can’t hire a wonk to come up with Cain’s answer on strategy. That’s the money passage. That’s why you vote for someone or don’t. The perspective Cain expressed is a matter of character and ideological stance. You either have it or you don’t; speaking more precisely about China’s nukes isn’t evidence of it either way. In the important aspect of the China issue, Cain was right.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 1:03 AM

He gave the important answer correctly, in my view: the way to address the problem of China is to outgrow China. Reassert the economic leadership of liberty.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 1:03 AM

Ok, how does the US outgrow China? “Reassert the economic leadership of liberty” sounds nice, but how realistically?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Irrespective of the proper context, his statement also leaves a lot to be proud of. A nuclear powered aircraft carrier isn’t a bigger threat than a conventionally powered ship to the degree that Cain was intimating. He made it sound like it would be the end of our superiority. It certainly is an advantage in certain respects, but there are other weapons systems that are a greater threat. As a matter of fact, their diesel subs are a huge threat because they are very, very quite. And the stealth aircraft they have developed are, if actually operational, a serious concern.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 1:09 AM

But, on the other hand, how uninformed was Barack Obama one year before the election? …

Lourdes on November 1, 2011 at 9:16 PM

The MSM didn’t know, and didn’t care.

Listen and watch.

fred5678 on November 2, 2011 at 1:17 AM

I can’t even say Meh. It’s got to be Beh.

Why does this guy give statements that he has to clarify?

antisocial on November 2, 2011 at 1:25 AM

How disgusting that certain people like csdeven and punchenko would rather tear down a an actual Conservative just to get their squish into the nomination.
If I were as pathetic as you two I’d kill myself. Thank God I’m not.

Hard Right on November 2, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Cain can get a brief any time. But you can’t hire a wonk to come up with Cain’s answer on strategy. That’s the money passage. That’s why you vote for someone or don’t.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 1:03 AM

Erm… cough, cough…

Do you recall another candidate gave a similar answer in the debates and we were told he was not a good debater?

2011 GOP Debate at Dartmouth College, NH (Oct. 11, 2011)

PERRY: What we need to be focused on in this country today is not whether or not we’re going to have this policy or that policy. What we need to be focused on is how we get America working again. That’s where we need to be focused. I can promise you that we do that and we’ll create an environment in this country where the manufacturing will come back to this country. We did it in Texas. We brought CHI Manufacturing, that had business in China, back to the state of Texas. You free up this country’s entrepreneurs where they know that they can risk their capital and have a chance to have a return on investment and all of this conversation that we’re having [on a trade war with China] becomes substantially less impactful.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Herman Cain was awesome on the OReilly Factor.

balkanmom on November 2, 2011 at 1:31 AM

Before we throw our own guys under the bus, let’s at least try and get our facts straight. This entire thread is based on an incorrect transcript.

MisterPundit on November 1, 2011 at 11:12 PM

Sure… is that the new defense from Cain’s campaign?

LOL…

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

I’ll just point it out again.

Herman Cain spent the Vietnam war evaluating the capabilities of the Chinese to deliver a nuclear weapon onto the heads of our forces in South Vietnam.

He examined the test launches of the Dongfeng 1 (SS-1) and plotted out the trajectories for a 500kg warheads.

When China started testing the Dongfeng 2 (CSS-1) Cain plotted out the trajectories and capabilities of it’s delivery of 15 kiloton nuclear weapons.

Both of these missiles were provided to the PRC by the Soviets, Cain analysed data from the Russian test launches and determined the risk to U.S. troops in SE Asia.

Cain also observed the development of China’s first domestically produced missile, Dongfeng 3 (CSS-2) and plotted out it’s use with China’s 15-20KT fissile devices as well as China’s new thermonuclear devices.

Finally, Cain was involved in the determination that China’s Dongfeng 4 (CSS-3) was capable of delivering both fissile and thermonuclear devices to both Moscow and Guam as well as cover the entire deployment of U.S. forces in SE Asia.

Cain is well aware of China’s nuclear missile capability, the only reasonable conclusion is that Cain was indeed referring to China’s attempts to develop and sail their first nuclear aircraft carrier and their attempts to develop more dangerous nuclear cruisers.

China is indeed trying to develop nuclear capacity, over and above what they already possess, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with stating that fact.

Once again, this pile-on is unjustified by the community that wishes to portray itself as conservative and what is supposed to be honest vetting of a candidate has devolved into petty and illogical intra-partisan gamesmanship.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

How disgusting that certain people like csdeven and punchenko would rather tear down a an actual Conservative just to get their squish into the nomination.
If I were as pathetic as you two I’d kill myself. Thank God I’m not.

Hard Right on November 2, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Awwwwww……wadda madder wittle baby? Did you get your poor wittle fweeelings hurt? Tell you what, go ask your grammy to make you some warm milk and cookies so you can fweel all better.

And while you’re talking to yer grammy, ask her what it means to put on ones big boy pants.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 1:38 AM

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Where is that information coming from?

His website says… Herman continued his education by earning his Master’s degree in computer science from Purdue University while working full-time developing fire control systems for ships and fighter planes for the Department of the Navy. Though Herman enjoyed using his talents as a civilian employee for the Navy, he gravitated towards the culture of business.

sharrukin on November 2, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Isn’t China developing the first Thorium reactor?

CrankyTRex on November 2, 2011 at 1:59 AM

Ok, how does the US outgrow China? “Reassert the economic leadership of liberty” sounds nice, but how realistically?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 1:08 AM

It’s very simple. For the sake of this argument, I’m going to round the numbers to the nearest trillion.

China’s GDP is 6 trillion. US GDP is 15 trillion.

China’s growth is 3.5 percent, ours is 1. Right now, China is growing faster than we are, but if you add in inflation (our 3 to their 5.5), we’re about equal in rate of growth.

If our economy ticks up just another .5 percent, we’re outpacing China to a very large degree, or in other words, “we outgrow them”.

Now if you consider the pegged RMB to the market dollar, and you find a President who forces the RMB onto the market (which is doable if one has the political will), and wham-o, the Chinese GDP takes about a 40% reduction in actual value against the dollar. They cannot catch up with us at that point with a directed economy, and if they shift to a fully market economy, they must succumb to the desires of the masses for infrastructure in the provinces that at this time China has no desire to finance. Add that to the mix and China cannot catch up with the U.S. in our children’s, children’s lifetime, especially if China also wants to develop their Army to be on a par with the U.S.; they eventually find themselves in the same place as the Soviets did when they collapsed.

It’s very easy to “outgrow” China, we just have put our foot slightly on the accelerator pedal and stop just idling along.

If we continue to idle along, China will indeed catch us. Sometime around 2085.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 2:02 AM

I’ll just point it out again. Herman Cain spent the Vietnam war evaluating the capabilities of the Chinese to deliver a nuclear weapon…

And I’ll just point it out again, the actual quote is NOT what Allah and Ace reported:

they’re trying to develop nuclear capability AND they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have.

Rather, what Cain said is:

they’re trying to develop nuclear capability IN EN they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have.

The “IN” is distinct. The second word “EN” is indistinct, but closer to “AND” than “IN”. Regardless, it is clear Cain did not brain fart, i.e. forget China is a nuclear power.

Why promote such absurdity? 1) stupidity, 2)scheming politics, or 3)simple comment-volume-whoremongering. Take your pick.

G. Charles on November 2, 2011 at 2:07 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 12:13 AM

You and Aslan’girl are slowly morphin into Jenfidels.

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Man, I need to remember not to drink while reading…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 2:22 AM

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 1:38 AM

What the frick??? Are you really allowed up this late? My God, I’ve heard better comments on my 8yr old’s fb page. You really are scrapping the barrel to find your brains. Hard Right really made you get your panties in a wad…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 AM

Why promote such absurdity? 1) stupidity, 2)scheming politics, or 3)simple comment-volume-whoremongering. Take your pick.

G. Charles on November 2, 2011 at 2:07 AM

Or 4) All of the above….

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 AM

sharrukin on November 2, 2011 at 1:51 AM

While at Purdue, he did do that, but that wasn’t the extent of his work for the Department of the Navy.

After Purdue and his work on fire control, he returned to Geogria, and was directed back to work with the Department of the Navy by his local draft board. Upon returning to a civilian position with the Department of the Navy, he worked on rocket assisted projectiles (which eventually became 5″ BTERM and ANSR rounds) , after that, his group worked on Chinese ballistic missile trajectories and threat analysis as well as a short time working on the threats posed during the Cuban missile crisis (which involved the R-14 which is also the Dongfeng 3).

Cain speaks of this in his book, also on his radio show, also briefly in an interview with Larry O.D. and most recently in his visit to Huntsville, AL. Most of the people that Cain worked with then now work at Marshall and Stennis, are avid Cain supporters and not shy about what they worked with Cain on.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 AM

To avoid confusion or challenge by CMC history buffs, the SS-4, R-14 and Dongfeng 3 are all actually the same missile, just in U.S. codename, Russian and Chinese designations, respectively.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 AM

Isn’t China developing the first Thorium reactor?

CrankyTRex on November 2, 2011 at 1:59 AM

Pretty much everyone is developing the Thorium reactor. We’re doing it in Colorado, the Brits, the French, Swiss, Indians, Russians, even the Poles are doing it.

China is racing ahead with a large scale vessel to house a scaled up reactor, but it’s probable that they are putting the cart a bit before the horse as their attempts to scale it up aren’t going well.

The Chinese reactor was on a 10 year plan, that fell through and now it’s on a 20 year plan. As we’ve just learned that the TFE plant that was to provide the fluorine to that reactor has been re-purposed to provide materials Chinese military uniforms to defeat thermal imaging systems, it’s likely that the Chinese reactor will be moved to the prefecture’s 30 year plan soon.

People often mistake Chinese announcements of projects to be something that is starting at that moment, but usually a Chinese announcement like the 4G/5G Thorium Reactor just means that they’ve put it on a 10,20 or 30 year plan and not that the project is actually underway.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 2:57 AM

Once again, this pile-on is unjustified by the community that wishes to portray itself as conservative and what is supposed to be honest vetting of a candidate has devolved into petty and illogical intra-partisan gamesmanship.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Please remember this with all the cheap shots against Romney.

scotash on November 2, 2011 at 3:16 AM

Please remember this with all the cheap shots against Romney.

scotash on November 2, 2011 at 3:16 AM

The only shot I ever make at Romney is to question why he refused to release the correspondence between his administration and the MA state legislature, and a specific question of whether or not he support’s or supported MassCare’s mission statement.

He said he’d release the correspondence back in 07, but then bowed out of the race. His campaign refuses to comment on when or whether he will release said correspondence now.

I also note that the left in MA stated in 07 that they had copies of all the correspondence and that they would use it against him in the general election should he be the candidate.

I have also repeatedly defended Perry and Newt on cheap shots leveled against them.

Honestly vetting candidates I have ZERO problem with.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 3:25 AM

I think it is entertaining to see all you that bash on Romney that when your guy is written in a way that you do not like you all come to his defenses just as we who like Romney do…but somehow we are Romneybots or whatever name you like to throw out there!

Just so you all know, I have and WILL support ANY of our candidates and do not name call your choices. I just think many of you need to re-read your comments above that consistently bash our guy and see how hypocritical you have been the last several months.

g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 3:32 AM

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 3:25 AM

Good to know and agree on honestly vetting…

I think we need to realize there are NO perfect candidates because we are all human and make mistakes, however, some here bash needlessly and this ONLY hurts OUR SIDE. As a military member you should never undercut your ultimate mission and many here on HA do this daily!

g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 3:35 AM

Yeap, if this loser naif is what Republican primary voters want to be our nominee then I will vote for Obama. I’m not going to be part of letting conservatism be destroyed by this inexperienced neophyte.

jarodea on November 2, 2011 at 4:13 AM

This is why we may need a Newt Gingrich in the number 2 slot for his foreign policy knowledge. (And we need Bolton in the State Department to tell ‘em how it is once Cain takes over.)

{^_^}

herself on November 2, 2011 at 4:23 AM

Yeap, if this loser naif is what Republican primary voters want to be our nominee then I will vote for Obama. I’m not going to be part of letting conservatism be destroyed by this inexperienced neophyte.

jarodea on November 2, 2011 at 4:13 AM

THIS is the attitude that got us Obama because everyone sitting home in 2006 led to Dems control in Congress and then the constant beating by the MSM on Bush the last years of his presidency…actually his whole presidency, BUT with the Dems in control since 2007 it was easier to rip on Bush and that led to Obama.

Some of you do not realize that is what you are doing now with Romney and that will elect Obama for another 4 more years! So I have to really ask who’s side are you really on?

Romney has Judge Bork, former AG Michael Mukasey, and many other highly qualified leaders backing and advising him. He is NOT going to act the way you believe he will in your posts nor did he as Governor.

g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 5:02 AM

Lol!

Look at these Republicans!

They throw dirts to each other and they blame the Libtards.

Well, may be it’s part of their conservative free market competitiveness, like the natural law of “kill ‘em if you must in order to survive … especially in a political gamefest called primaries”!

Ha ha ha!

Then, they switch between being “principled” or “unprincipled but strategic” in order to push for their master politicos (almost all RINOs)!

Bwahahahahaha!

Sorry, Repugs! Unless you all switch to “principled” voting, you can never defeat the mighty wind of Multi-culturalist, Pandering Socialism in America!

TheAlamos on November 2, 2011 at 5:22 AM

A lot of you must have missed this from a few days ago…

Exclusive: Inside Herman Cain’s new foreign policy team

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/10/26/raising_cain_inside_herman_cain_s_new_foreign_policy_team

Gordon, who served 20 years on active duty in the Navy, worked at the Pentagon from 2005 to 2009 in the public affairs section of the Office of the Secretary of Defense under Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates. For four years he was, among other things, the Pentagon’s lead spokesman on detainee issues and led media tours to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Since leaving government, he has been running a consulting firm with his former business partner Lee Cohen, a former staffer for House Foreign Affairs Committee chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).

Broadly speaking, Cain’s foreign policy stances aren’t so different from other leading candidates such as Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. They include a focus on relationships with allies, strong advocacy for maintaining defense spending, impassioned support for the U.S.-Israel relationship, and skepticism of providing foreign aid to countries that don’t support U.S. policies.

Like Romney and Perry, Cain also doesn’t have a lot of foreign policy experience, although he has traveled to 20 countries on six continents, said Gordon. His campaign is aware that travel alone doesn’t equal experience, and is using Gordon’s connections to make up ground fast

Yeah, this is a man that worked for the navy on missle defense, and he is obvious to China…right…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 5:25 AM

He is NOT going to act the way you believe he will in your posts nor did he as Governor.

g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 5:02 AM

And you know this how? I mean with his record, we have no idea how he is going to act…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 5:27 AM

The fact that we’re about to have a debate in the comments about whether he knows China has nukes doesn’t bode well for the general election campaign against Obama.

I interpret this to mean “some people are so cosmically ignorant of Herman Cain’s life, even though he recently published a book about it, that they will run with “the pizza guy” narrative the MSM has set up.”

What’s next Allahpundit? If Ace mangles a transcript of Cain speaking on monetary policy, are you going to run with a comment-bating thread about that?

Because you see, not only has Herman Cain twice identified the problems in failing enterprises and fixed them, he has also done ballistics work for the Navy and been the chairman of the Kansas City federal reserve. Any insinuations he wouldn’t know about the nuclear capability of basically any country are thus just wild-eyed fantasies of the paid staffers and trolls of other candidates.

I’d love to know Romney’s current position on anything, except he hasn’t been brave enough to be interviewed this election cycle. I already know Perry’s position on everything, mostly because he stole his energy policy from Palin and his economic policy from Steve Forbes.

BKennedy on November 2, 2011 at 5:38 AM

THIS is the attitude that got us Obama because everyone sitting home in 2006 led to Dems control in Congress and then the constant beating by the MSM on Bush the last years of his presidency…actually his whole presidency, BUT with the Dems in control since 2007 it was easier to rip on Bush and that led to Obama.

Some of you do not realize that is what you are doing now with Romney and that will elect Obama for another 4 more years! So I have to really ask who’s side are you really on?

Romney has Judge Bork, former AG Michael Mukasey, and many other highly qualified leaders backing and advising him. He is NOT going to act the way you believe he will in your posts nor did he as Governor.

g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 5:02 AM

Right, I only was one of the “don’t throw a tizzy conservatives and give things to Pelosi” Republicans. I even had a blog at the time at which I railed against the “cut off your nose to spite your face” conservatives. I was ignored.

That was a different time though, conservatives have decided to become insane like liberals then. Not that it surprises me. Conservatives have joined liberals and deserve what they will get; I just don’t like that I have to be with you.

jarodea on November 2, 2011 at 5:41 AM

Cain quote “They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have”. I have no problem with this quote. It’s obvious what Cain was trying to say (develop their nuclear subs). Come on Hot Air, quit the misleading headlines in your attempt to make Cain look bad. It’s getting old.

robama on November 2, 2011 at 6:56 AM

Boy, there are a lot of Perry haters on here! What are you going to do if he happens to win it all?? and dont say he won’t -just looka the example of John Mccain winning.
Let’s slam obama I say.

Bullhead on November 2, 2011 at 12:04 AM

I will not vote for GOP amnesty shill for president under any circumstance. When I think of Perry, I think of the 2016 election and the chance for a Rubio presidency.

thuja on November 2, 2011 at 6:59 AM

I’d love to know Romney’s current position on anything, except he hasn’t been brave enough to be interviewed this election cycle. I already know Perry’s position on everything, mostly because he stole his energy policy from Palin and his economic policy from Steve Forbes.

BKennedy on November 2, 2011 at 5:38 AM

You guys/gals always find it difficult to give Perry credit for anything, right?

According to his critics, he is the dumbo that still managed to win re-election three times and currently presides over a state that has the best jobs record.

Continue to underestimate him at your peril. KBH did and found out the hard way.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:20 AM

Looks like Romney is in.

CW on November 2, 2011 at 7:20 AM

I will not vote for GOP amnesty shill for president under any circumstance. When I think of Perry, I think of the 2016 election and the chance for a Rubio presidency.

thuja on November 2, 2011 at 6:59 AM

And what will you do in 2016 when Rubio is attacked for holding the same position as Rick Perry with respect to legislation akin to the Texas Dream Act?

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:22 AM

Looks like Romney is in.

CW on November 2, 2011 at 7:20 AM

Maybe for his 25% supporters.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:22 AM

And while you’re talking to yer grammy, ask her what it means to put on ones big boy pants.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 1:38 AM

You do have a grammy problem, you know that? You are always taking shots at people that they live in their grammy’s basement and they should go ask grammy for milk, etc.

What did your grammy do to you? You can tell me – I only charge a $1000 per hour.

:)

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:30 AM

You guys/gals always find it difficult to give Perry credit for anything, right?

According to his critics, he is the dumbo that still managed to win re-election three times and currently presides over a state that has the best jobs record.

Continue to underestimate him at your peril. KBH did and found out the hard way.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:20 AM

So in other words:

Perry is the best man for Texas.

Let him stay there, since clearly he’s not ready for the national stage. He is incompetent to defend against what will be Obama’s narrative, which is that a bumbling Texas governor is a third Bush term.

Perry does well when he basks in the glow of the individual Texans he wisely stayed out of the way of in terms of government intervention. He should come back in 2016 when that narrative no longer has any sway, and he has had enough time to develop his own policies.

The same people who criticized 9-9-9 and all of Cain’s other positions on the issues are the same people who cut Perry, who was supposed to be the most super serious NotRomney contender, far too much slack for not having developed a single policy position during the debates. Perry literally thought he could win by being NotRomney and NotObama.

BKennedy on November 2, 2011 at 7:30 AM

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 AM

Awwwwww… did someone else not get their way? Is the big bad world too tough and mean for you? You should go see is if your baby friend will share his warm milk and cookies with you.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 7:32 AM

Sure… is that the new defense from Cain’s campaign?

LOL…

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Wow, grow up. Since when is asking for factual reporting a “defense” now?

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 7:36 AM

You are always taking shots at people that they live in their grammy’s basement and they should go ask grammy for milk, etc.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:30 AM

I think grammy’s are angels on earth.

Oh wait a minute…I get what your problem is now!

Poor, poor wittle baby….is your grammy mean to you? Are you jealous that others get their warm milk and cookies from their grammy’s and you don’t?

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 7:39 AM

So in other words:

Perry is the best man for Texas.

Yep, just like Reagan was the best man for California.

Let him stay there, since clearly he’s not ready for the national stage. He is incompetent to defend against what will be Obama’s narrative, which is that a bumbling Texas governor is a third Bush term.

So what makes you think he is not ready for the national stage? His ideology? His proposals? His record? Oh no! Obama will say he is Bush III. And what will Obama say about Cain? Romney? Is that how you choose your candidates?

Perry does well when he basks in the glow of the individual Texans he wisely stayed out of the way of in terms of government intervention. He should come back in 2016 when that narrative no longer has any sway, and he has had enough time to develop his own policies.

And isn’t that what conservatives want? Someone who will get the government to stay out of the way? Or you prefer Romney who promises to manage Big Govt. better than Obama? In essence, a Democrat-lite?

The same people who criticized 9-9-9 and all of Cain’s other positions on the issues are the same people who cut Perry, who was supposed to be the most super serious NotRomney contender, far too much slack for not having developed a single policy position during the debates. Perry literally thought he could win by being NotRomney and NotObama.

BKennedy on November 2, 2011 at 7:30 AM

How stupid does this statement sound when you consider that Perry currently has the most solid proposals – a tax reform plan and a jobs plan – amongst all the candidates. Care to tell me of Romney’s 59-point non-plan? Or Cain’s discredited 9-9-9?

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:44 AM

Cain is not ready for prime time and I don’t think he’s qualified to become President. That becomes more apparent every time he opens his mouth.

zoyclem on November 2, 2011 at 7:47 AM

And what will you do in 2016 when Rubio is attacked for holding the same position as Rick Perry with respect to legislation akin to the Texas Dream Act?

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:22 AM

From what I have read, Rubio opposes amnesty for the illegal aliens. Maybe he has done some action on immigration that I disagree with, but I’m not looking for 100% agreement. I’m looking for someone I mostly agree with.

And it is not just what Perry has done. It’s how Perry attacked the vast majority of the GOP who disagree with his amnesty stance. He accused us of not having a “heart”. Insulting the primary voters of your own party isn’t a path to victory.

thuja on November 2, 2011 at 7:52 AM

Poor, poor wittle baby….is your grammy mean to you? Are you jealous that others get their warm milk and cookies from their grammy’s and you don’t?

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 7:39 AM

Yep, you sure have a grammy problem – confirmed!

Now please contact my receptionist and book your first therapy session. We will need approx. one-and-a-half hours at $1000/hr.

No credit cards accepted (who knows? might be your grammy’s card) – only cash please.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:54 AM

I am pretty sure that our country’s security is an “OH SH!T!!” moment for all those who enter the White House and I bet it has gotten worse since 9/11. It would be great if our guys sounded teachable. Is that a higher standard than The Won was held to? Absolutely. Life is weird.

Cindy Munford on November 2, 2011 at 7:59 AM

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 7:54 AM

Your grammy wont give you cookies like the other grammy’s give out cookies and you think someone else has the problem? Do us all a favor will ya? Don’t ever leave the confines of your grammy’s basement.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 8:02 AM

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 7:32 AM

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 7:39 AM

Does your mother know you are sitting there typing with her best dress on? YOur comments show the sum total of your intellectual capacity…but you keep on sucking your thumb. We adults will carry on the conversation without you…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 8:06 AM

From what I have read, Rubio opposes amnesty for the illegal aliens.

And so does Rick Perry. He opposes amnesty for illegal aliens.

Maybe he has done some action on immigration that I disagree with, but I’m not looking for 100% agreement. I’m looking for someone I mostly agree with.

Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush agree with Rick Perry on in-state tuition for kids of illegals. This is essentially what the Texas Dream Act did. It does not grant amnesty – the federal law proposed by McCain/Kennedy and recently Obama will have done that.

And it is not just what Perry has done. It’s how Perry attacked the vast majority of the GOP who disagree with his amnesty stance. He accused us of not having a “heart”. Insulting the primary voters of your own party isn’t a path to victory.

thuja on November 2, 2011 at 7:52 AM

And he apologized for that. It was a poor choice of words. How many times must he apologize or what else should he do? Surprisingly, those who continue to hold umbrage at him for this are quicker to forgive the weaknesses and insults of less conservative candidates.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 8:09 AM

I liked Perry until his ” Dream Act” was made known. I find Perry’s Dream Act worse than Romneycare but I guess thats just me. I have 2 kids in college and one attends an out of state school where I pay a non resident penalty.

Dennis D on November 2, 2011 at 8:19 AM

Why didn’t Judy Woodruff ask a followup question re: China nukes? Are you trying to say she wouldn’t love to nail the GOP frontrunner? There are 2 possible explanations.

1) she doesn’t herself know that China has nukes (unlikely), or

2) in the flow of the conversation she took it to mean he was referring to aircraft carriers.

I’ll take number 2.

Having said that, Herman! get your act together! This thing could be just about over if you could get your messaging straight. This is a problem. You tell us you’re a problem solver. Solve this problem pronto!

TedInATL on November 2, 2011 at 8:27 AM

gaffetastic!! All aboard the Cain Train!!

gatorboy on November 2, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Cain’s first career was as a Navy ballistics analyst. Don’t read stupid into what he said of nuclear China’s carriers, merely out of spite. If Cain’s written or spoken previously, there’d be substance backing his intelligence; but he’s the unknown in whom we are expecting ourselves to trust. Hm. Been there, done that, not again. Not trusting w/o FIRST verifying, and even then, not trusting anything hidden.

Instead, focus on Cain’s economic ploy, what will actually come of his spending more with no cuts at all but MORE spending on Military than imaginable. So that is Cain’s plan for economic development, to spend more taxes on Military contracting without oversight on costs or even long term strategy, aside from outspending China. So it’s more of the same, the Cold War + domino effect, like that turned out so well last time for anyone’s summation. Cain’s plan would require America manufacturing independently stateside, but he’s not going there with his stump speeches. It’s as if he wants us to think that’s what he’s going to do, while he has no real intention of making such his platform. Let people believe what they want if their ignorance works to the politician’s personal/political advantage. Nothing new about that, either. Cain is playing Obama’s ’08 Hopey changey “Yes We Cain” for all it’s worth–to me, NOT.

Given our contemporary opportunity ’12, I’d right the wrong rather than repeat the democratic vote to execute the “Gadfly” for publicly debating the obvious state-defense necessity given dire times of wars, Athens executing Socrates rather than listen and pay heed before it was too late. Pride and the fall.

maverick muse on November 2, 2011 at 8:30 AM

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

you got a cite for all that?? everything i have read says he developed fire control systems for ships and aircraft.

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 8:38 AM

Was he thinking they were asking about North Korea? Surely he knows China has nukes.

I know at times I will have in my mind that I am talking about one thing, but I’m saying another. That is really the only explanation, lol.

jeffn21 on November 2, 2011 at 8:41 AM

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:34 AM

everything i have read says he developed fire control systems for ships and aircraft.

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 8:38 AM

“you got a cite for all that??” Fire control systems for ships/aircraft, as in fire fighting?!

Ready wiki reference general info: Cain analyzed ballistics for the Navy, computer analysis of data, which expertise prepared him for Pillsbury, Inc. corporate consultant, providing computer analysis of business data, eventually leading to a CEO position, and remaining a popular computer analyst consultant for many corporate boards.

maverick muse on November 2, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Cain on Foreign Policy, Bush III, painted as another Reagan extension from GHWBush I.

maverick muse on November 2, 2011 at 9:04 AM

IIRC, China tested their first device in 1964.

Ward Cleaver on November 2, 2011 at 9:13 AM

gatorboy on November 2, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Unlike Gov. Romney who says everything and means nothing.

Cindy Munford on November 2, 2011 at 9:16 AM

We adults will carry on the conversation without you…

lovingmyUSA on November 2, 2011 at 8:06 AM

Awwwww…..wadda madder? Do you think using big person words is how you put your big boy pants on?

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 9:33 AM

“you got a cite for all that??” Fire control systems for ships/aircraft, as in fire fighting?!

maverick muse on November 2, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Fire Control systems refer to weapons use.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 9:37 AM

This is my parsing of the phrase

They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability [like we have] and they want to develop more aircraft carriers [like we have].

AverageJoe on November 2, 2011 at 9:38 AM

China is developing their “nuclear capabilities”. China has a shallow nuclear triad deterrent as far as the US (China shaped their nuke deterrent mainly for the ole Soviet Union). Only a few dozen nuclear tipped ICBM’s that can range the US mainland, no bombers that would survive past Guam, and a mere handful of boomers that are load enough to be heard from Hawaii (they may make the first chain).

http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=292&catid=8&subcatid=51

So yes China is developing their “nuclear capabilities” to now deter the US.

—–Land-Increasing production of ICBM’s,better targeting (thank you Clinton), building huge “miles” of tunnels to hide their ICBM’s in (makes targeting horrific).
—–Sea-continued development and expansion of their boomers
—–Air-they have some bombers on the drawing boards will have to see

I would call it a slip of tongue or more likely having heard Cain speak on the radio over the years his version of slang that just drops words from sentences.

C-Low on November 2, 2011 at 9:41 AM

I find it hard to believe anyone really believes Cain is unaware of China’s nuclear capability.

thebriand on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 AM

What does ‘neoconservative’ mean? What is the ‘Right of Return’? What is your stance on abortion? Would you swap Gitmo prisoners for hostages? How close are the Iranians to achieving nuclear capability?

Cain fumbled all of the above, so yes, I can believe he didn’t know China has nukes. And then of course there was his response in the debate to shortcomings in his beloved 9-9-9 plan: ‘Apples and oranges! Apples and oranges!’ Not exactly a well-articulated defense of his cornerstone policy planning achievement.

Bottom line: Should Herman Cain win the GOP nomination, President Obama will dismantle him in a live, televised debate, and we will lose our best chance to halt and hopefully reverse the transformation of our beloved country into a failing socialist superstate. Voting for Cain in the primaries is obvious folly. Staying home and not voting in the general election because the GOP candidate doesn’t meet safe district Republican standards of conservative ideological purity is also folly.

troyriser_gopftw on November 2, 2011 at 9:47 AM

“Nuclear-powered aircraft carriers,” is a non sequetor. He is probably referring to DELIVERABLE nuclear WEAPONS, mating a portable nuclear weapon with a delivery system.

burt on November 2, 2011 at 10:03 AM

They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability [like we have] and they want to develop more aircraft carriers [like we have].

AverageJoe on November 2, 2011 at 9:38 AM

Even if it were, the reason I take second notice is because the issue of nuke powered aircraft carriers isn’t as big of a deal as other weapons systems that are a bigger threat and he made it sound like it was the biggest threat we face.

csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Uggg… This guy is just not ready for prime time. I’m sorry, but the bloom has come off the rose for Herman with me.

*sigh* What is going on with the Republican party??

Nineball on November 2, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Cain was talking about developing their nuclear arsenal by advancing the current technology not actually developing the nuke itself. *facepalm*

msipes on November 2, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6