Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Republican case for ratifying New START
WaPo ^ | 12/2/2010 | Henry A. Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Lawrence S. Eagleburger & Colin L. Powell

Posted on 12/02/2010 11:21:07 AM PST by mojito

Republican presidents have long led the crucial fight to protect the United States against nuclear dangers. That is why Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush negotiated the SALT I, START I and START II agreements. It is why President George W. Bush negotiated the Moscow Treaty. All four recognized that reducing the number of nuclear arms in an open, verifiable manner would reduce the risk of nuclear catastrophe and increase the stability of America's relationship with the Soviet Union and, later, the Russian Federation. The world is safer today because of the decades-long effort to reduce its supply of nuclear weapons.

As a result, we urge the Senate to ratify the New START treaty signed by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. It is a modest and appropriate continuation of the START I treaty that expired almost a year ago. It reduces the number of nuclear weapons that each side deploys while enabling the United States to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent and preserving the flexibility to deploy those forces as we see fit.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: kissinger; start; starttreaty
The foreign policy establishment speaks.
1 posted on 12/02/2010 11:21:10 AM PST by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mojito

Yeah, what a lineup of globalist rinos.


2 posted on 12/02/2010 11:24:22 AM PST by HerrBlucher (Defund, repeal, investigate, impeach, convict, jail, celebrate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

didn’t Colin Powell stop calling himself a Republican?

How many Obama voters among those?


3 posted on 12/02/2010 11:24:26 AM PST by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com <--- My Fiction/ Science Fiction Board)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

The usual suspects.


4 posted on 12/02/2010 11:25:55 AM PST by headstamp 2 ("My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

“WaPo ^ | 12/2/2010 | Henry A. Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Lawrence S. Eagleburger & Colin L. Powell “

Ummmmmmm.... Yeah.....


5 posted on 12/02/2010 11:28:49 AM PST by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: mojito

OMG!! THESE FREAKS AGAIN!!


7 posted on 12/02/2010 11:30:27 AM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Looks like someone has already rounded up the usual suspects.

8 posted on 12/02/2010 11:31:11 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

I miss Cap Wienberger.


9 posted on 12/02/2010 11:32:22 AM PST by Sybeck1 (Is it proper etiquette to tip after a enhanced pat down?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Colon Bowel has been full of it for several years now.

I just wish he’d hold it in instead of blowing it out at us.


10 posted on 12/02/2010 11:35:20 AM PST by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I’d trade the lot of ‘em for John Bolton and Sarah Palin.


11 posted on 12/02/2010 11:37:05 AM PST by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mojito
The Russians are laughing at obama's weakness.

12 posted on 12/02/2010 11:37:58 AM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

My understanding of START includes the idea that we have to ask “permision” to upgrade our defense systems and that we will cancel our plans for upgrades to our submarine fleet. If this is true, I would turn it down. First, we don’t ask permision from anyone. Second, we should not agree to anything that stops us from upgrading any of our ships.


13 posted on 12/02/2010 11:41:25 AM PST by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Negotiating a START treaty with Russia will only make us incrementally safer from nuclear war as both sides are pretty unlikely to use them, conditioned as we are from a 50-year Cold War confrontation.

OTOH, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and others are “wild-cards”. Predicting what they might do and under what circumstances is anybody’s guess. Real action in this quarter would be expensive & difficult, so we just go in for more window-dressing with the Russians.


14 posted on 12/02/2010 11:45:15 AM PST by Tallguy (Received a fine from the NFL for a helmet-to-helmet hit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2
From “New START: What Would Reagan Do?” by Ed Meese and Richard Perle in today’s WSJ:

“The administration claims that the treaty has no effect on any American missile-defense program. Surely it knows better. Paragraph nine of the preamble establishes a bias against missile defense. It accepts our “current” defenses while implying that future U.S. defensive systems might undermine the “viability and effectiveness” of Russia's strategic nuclear force.

With this unfortunate paragraph, New Start returns to the old Cold War “balance of terror” and assumes that attempts to defend the U.S. and its allies with missile defenses against strategic attack are threatening to Russia and thus destabilizing.

Limiting missile defenses to preserve U.S. vulnerability to Russian strategic nuclear strikes (as defined by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, President Dmitry Medvedev or their successors) will result in less effective defenses against any and all countries, including Iran and North Korea.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704679204575647183506149438.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

The article is a good antidote to the Kissinger et al piece.

15 posted on 12/02/2010 12:00:22 PM PST by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

Nuke ping.


16 posted on 12/02/2010 12:01:21 PM PST by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Trying too hard to sell the treaty which tells me that the Zero is negotiating from a weak position. If passed, the USA will soon be assuming the same position.


17 posted on 12/02/2010 12:04:30 PM PST by crazyhorse691 (Now that the libs are in power dissent is not only unpatriotic, but, it is also racist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito
From the Russian News and Information Agency:
July 27, 2006
"'I am determined to expand relations with Russia,' Chavez, known as an outspoken critic of what he calls the United States' unilateralism, told the Russian leader, adding that his determination stemmed from their shared vision of the global order.":
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060727/51913498.html
______________________________________________________________

We are creating a new world, a balanced world. A new world order, a multipolar world,” Chavez told reporters during a visit to Communist China, one of many. His “new world order” includes [RUSSIA], China, Iran,... and a significantly weakened United States, he explained.

Resurgent Communism in Latin America
by Alex Newman, March 16, 2010:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/south-america-mainmenu-37/3122-resurgent-communism-in-latin-america?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page=

18 posted on 12/02/2010 12:06:38 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
______________________________________________________________

"Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants."

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed092605a.cfm

19 posted on 12/02/2010 12:07:18 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Russia's Medvedev hails "comrade" Obama

Associated Foreign Press (AFP) ^ | April 2, 2009 | Anna Smolchenko

"Russia's Dmitry Medvedev hailed Barack Obama as "my new comrade" Thursday after their first face-to-face talks"

http://www.france24.com/en/20090402-russias-medvedev-hails-comrade-obama

April 1, 2009:
"Obama, Medvedev pledge new era of relations":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090401/wl_afp/usrussiadiplomacynuclear_20090401152002
______________________________________________________________

Photobucket
President Obama and Venezuela dictator Hugo
Chavez at the 2009 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad.
Note the "soul bro" handshake. (my caption)

Obama, Chavez shake hands at Americas Summit:
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2009/04/17/2698451-obama-chavez-shake-hands-at-americas-summit

20 posted on 12/02/2010 12:07:56 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
21 posted on 12/02/2010 12:08:37 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Quix; Whenifhow; houeto; null and void; Squantos; xrmusn; bronxville; Screaming_Gerbil; ...
Peace-through-surrender ping.

(thanks mojito)

"Nuclear Terror" ping.

Ping list covering atomic/nuclear/thermonuclear terrifying events and discussions.

FReepmail me if vou want on or off The Comedian's "Nuclear Terror" ping list...


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

22 posted on 12/02/2010 12:11:33 PM PST by The Comedian (Government: Saving people from freedom since time immemorial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Not only does the new treaty wipe out a 1/3 of our nuclear missile force. It also takes out 1/2 our bombers and 1/2 our Submarines. Oh and the best part is the Russia can opt out and we cannot.

This is not just a no but a hell no!


23 posted on 12/02/2010 12:19:00 PM PST by Sprite518
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

You want to make your case for START? Wait for after the lame duck session.


24 posted on 12/02/2010 12:20:05 PM PST by ari-freedom (Happy Chanuka!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Soros lapdogs, one and all.


25 posted on 12/02/2010 12:29:15 PM PST by weeder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

“Republican presidents have long led the crucial fight to protect the United States against nuclear dangers. That is why Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush negotiated the SALT I, START I and START II agreements”

Arms agreements do not in any way, shape, or form protect anyone against nuclear dangers.


26 posted on 12/02/2010 12:30:34 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

“Negotiating a START treaty with Russia will only make us incrementally safer from nuclear war as both sides are pretty unlikely to use them”

If both sides are unlikely to use them, what the heck is the point of the treaty in the first place? That’s the problem with arms agreements. If they work, they were unecessary. If they don’t, all they do is reward agressors.


27 posted on 12/02/2010 12:33:54 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Man thats a lot of RINO Chicken crappers sitting on one roost


28 posted on 12/02/2010 12:36:50 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

“The article is a good antidote to the Kissinger et al piece.”

Why anyone should listen to Kissinger is beyond me. His entire rationale was that the USSR was no more evil, no more an agressor, no more a “destablizer” (or however they put it), than the U.S. His false idol was the “balance of power” of the post-Napoleonic era. If he could go back that far, it’s kinda ironic he didn’t go just a little further to realize what worked after Napoleon wouldn’t have meant anything to Napoleon (or Hitler, or Stalin, etc.)


29 posted on 12/02/2010 12:39:33 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mojito

These are a bunch of have been, whose mindset are still the same as it was in 1960s-1980s, when Russian was a threat. Yes, I know that Powell’s name is there, but he’s 0bama lover in the first place, so it doesn’t count.


30 posted on 12/02/2010 12:44:44 PM PST by paudio (The differences between Clinton and 0bama? About a dozen of former Democratic Congressmen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

The idea that the United States’ action in reducing its nuclear arsenal promotes peace is illogical. It makes no sense. How does making yourself weaker promote peace? Has any of these START treaties made the world safer? Has it prevented the spread of nuclear weapons? North Korea and Iran are developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems as we speak. How is START going to affect these countries? I can see nothing too coming from START.


31 posted on 12/02/2010 12:49:42 PM PST by Nosterrex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

As in

PEACE THROUGH SUICIDE

as a gift to one’s enemies ping.


32 posted on 12/02/2010 12:51:23 PM PST by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mojito

The RINOs calling for handcuffing America with a flawed treaty in a dangerous world.

HELL, NO!


33 posted on 12/02/2010 1:06:06 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Their opinion doesn’t add up to a cup of warm spit. They are all obsolete.


34 posted on 12/02/2010 2:38:38 PM PST by DarthVader (That which supports Barack Hussein Obama must be sterilized and there are NO exceptions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher
Yeah what a lineup of globalist rinos.

Yep...exactly right. They are not "GOP"...nor are they patriotic Americans...they are elitist Globalists...all big-time Council of Foreign Relations saboteurs of our national sovereignty.

Phyllis Schlafly made sure that Ronald Reagan kept his promise...and never once gave Kissinger ANY role in his government. And his foreign policy success was dramatic as a result. Too bad he had James Baker in the White House unfortunately. As we all know, he was one of the ones who helped make the whole Iran-Contra story accusations against Reagan so much bigger than it really was. The Bush's were hoping it would work...and they got their RINO buddy Howard Baker to 'help' Reagan as Chief of Staff. Fortunately, Howard didn't follow through with the Bush plan.

35 posted on 12/02/2010 4:51:35 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: First Authority
The MX were a counterforce weapon, not first strike, albeit they had the ability to be if...we had 3 X more of them. The MX gave us the ability to retaliate against their arsenal...after they struck first...and gave us the option of not having to nuke their cities. And by taking out their remaining missiles...that would keep them from thinking they could win. And their existence helped us prevent their attack, and thus caused their ultimate collapse as their nuclear war winning doctrine imploded.

Today, however, the clock is being wound back to before Reagan...to our extreme danger. The Russians for example, are busy deploying an equivalent mobile missile system to the MX...the Topol-M.... while we are dismantling systems...they are deploying.... H'mmm.

36 posted on 12/02/2010 4:56:50 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Henry A. Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Lawrence S. Eagleburger & Colin L. Powell

What a collection of pathetic losers. Living (in some cases barely breathing) memorials to the failed promise of the Republican Party to the silent majority of American Patriots across the land.


37 posted on 12/03/2010 4:47:04 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #38 Removed by Moderator

To: First Authority
The cities were always a simple target, soft and immobile. 'Sitting ducks'. The counterforce ability required not just power and accuracy, but 'immediacy' and the ability to be coordinated in a very facile way to not just hit already-emptied SS-18 silos...but the remaining ones the enemy would use for their 2nd and 3rd strikes. Hence, Operation Looking Glass capabilities was paramount. Gave the whole force a brain. And one that could survive a first strike. This was critical to countering the nuclear war winning strategy of the Soviets. And it worked.

Unfortunately, we have nothing like that running at high preparedness levels right now...despite clear and present evidence of mounting nuclear threats.

39 posted on 12/06/2010 7:06:25 AM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson