Republicans expected to line up behind New START

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (10 posts)
  1. rhamson profile image76
    rhamsonposted 8 years ago

    Yahoo:

    WASHINGTON – Despite near gridlock in the Senate, Republicans were expected to swing behind a new arms control treaty with Russia that President Barack Obama said they will like, even though some are reserving judgment until Obama can assure them the pact won't set back U.S. defenses against other potential foes such as North Korea and Iran.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100409/ap_ … _us_russia

  2. lovemychris profile image63
    lovemychrisposted 8 years ago

    Wow...I will be very surprised if that happens. Standing with the president?
    hmmmmm, what gives?
    There has got to be some underhanded motive for this.
    What's in it for the Republican Party?
    That' all you need to ask where they're concerned...what's in it for them?

  3. Arthur Fontes profile image81
    Arthur Fontesposted 8 years ago

    If missle defense systems are part of this treaty it will not be ratified by Congress.

    1. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Maybe a compromise will be met.  Just a thought.

      1. Arthur Fontes profile image81
        Arthur Fontesposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        I hope so but if we give up the right to defend ourselves and our allies we might pay the price in the future.

        It would be easy for Russia to agree to limit missle defense since they do not have any to give up.

  4. Ralph Deeds profile image67
    Ralph Deedsposted 8 years ago

    TREATY ADVANCES OBAMA'S NUCLEAR VISION

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/world … amp;st=cse

    Here's the NYT take on the treaty:

    Editorial
    Mr. Obama’s Nuclear Policy
    Published: April 6, 2010
    President Obama has spoken eloquently about his vision of a world without nuclear weapons. It is a lofty goal that will not be achieved during his presidency — or for years after that. But in a very dangerous time, he is taking important steps to make the world safer and bolster this country’s credibility as it tries to constrain the nuclear ambitions of Iran, North Korea and others.

    Two decades after the end of the cold war, the United States and Russia still have a combined total of more than 20,000 nuclear weapons. Mr. Obama has revived arms control negotiations, and later this week, he and President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia will sign a new agreement (the first since 2002) that will reduce the number of strategic warheads each side has deployed from 2,200 to 1,550.

    On Tuesday, Mr. Obama released his Nuclear Posture Review. It does not go as far as it should, but it is an important down payment on a saner nuclear policy.

    The document substantially narrows the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons. The last review — done in 2002 by the George W. Bush administration — gave nuclear weapons a “critical role” in defending the country and its allies and suggested that they could be used against foes wielding chemical, biological or even conventional forces.

    The new review says the “fundamental role” of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack on the United States and its allies, and it rules out the use of nuclear weapons against nonnuclear countries, even if they attack the United States with unconventional weapons.

    There is an important caveat. That assurance only goes to countries that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which leaves out North Korea and Iran. It would have been better if Mr. Obama made the “sole” purpose of nuclear weapons deterring a nuclear attack. No one in their right mind can imagine the United States ever using a nuclear weapon again. America’s vast conventional military superiority is more than enough to defend against most threats.

    This formulation seems mainly intended to deter hard-line critics on Capitol Hill. But any loophole undercuts Washington’s arguments that nonnuclear states have no strategic reason to develop their own arms.

    Mr. Obama has wisely made the prevention of nuclear terrorism and proliferation a central strategic priority. And the administration has rightly decided to lead by example. We were especially encouraged to see the review’s statement that the country “will not develop new nuclear warheads.” There is still some wiggle room, which we hope is not exercised. New nuclear warheads are not needed.

    The review commits to pursuing further arms reductions with Russia. And it says that future talks must also focus on cutting back the 15,000 warheads, in total, that the United States and Russia keep as backup — the so-called hedge — and short-range nuclear weapons.

    The United States has 500 tactical nuclear weapons, which are considered secure, but Russia has 3,000 or more that are far too vulnerable to theft. Any agreement will take years to complete, and Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev should start talking now. The review also commits to talking to China about its arsenal.

    Mr. Obama has committed to maintaining the safety and security of America’s nuclear stockpile. He has already backed that up with an extra $624 million in next year’s budget for the nuclear labs and promised — far too generously, in our view — an additional $5 billion over the next five years to build up their aging infrastructure. Mr. Obama has also promised support for more advanced conventional arms.

    None of those measures are likely to quiet his critics, who already are charging that Mr. Obama is weakening America’s defenses. They will likely get even louder when it comes time to ratify the New Start treaty with Russia and the long-deferred Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

    The stakes for this country’s security are high. And most Americans aren’t paying attention. Mr. Obama has a strong argument. He will need to push back hard.

  5. profile image0
    chasingcarsposted 8 years ago

    Excellent start; maybe Republicans are figuring that their strategy of freezing the Democrats out is not working.  I, too, am sceptical because their Tea Party base will soon start squealing.  The whole thing about keeping all of these nukes is ridiculous, of course.  If anyone drops one, the rest of us are toast.  I thought they figured that out during the cold war.  Anyway, the world needs to do some serious planning about what to safely do with all of the nuclear waste, yesterday.

    1. JON EWALL profile image76
      JON EWALLposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      chasingcars

      A treat to our security ?

      The Chinese are building their armies and are increasing the submarine fleet at a rapid pace.
      Should we be alarmed ? Just imagine a submarine fleet off our coast with nuclear missiles.
      We made a treaty with Russia, a ally of china,  Iran and whoever. The world is getting smaller day by day. Let's not fool ourselves, we do have enemies waiting for us to fall asleep.

    2. Sab Oh profile image53
      Sab Ohposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      This report just in live from Bizarro Superman World:

      "maybe Republicans are figuring that their strategy of freezing the Democrats out is not working"




      roll

    3. Sab Oh profile image53
      Sab Ohposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      "If anyone drops one, the rest of us are toast"

      People who have thought the subject through just a liiiiiiiittttttllllle bit further than that recognize the value of deterrence.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)