Republican opposition to the START treaty renewal

[Craig234]

There is strong Republican opposition to the renewal of the START treaty Obama negotiated.

There is some breaking in the ranks, with Sen. Lugar expressing anger at the Republicans who are opposed to and delaying the approval.

Supporters say the treaty is important at preventing proliferation, and that Republican opposition is nothing more than extremism in opposing Obama on anything.

Given the importance of the issue and how it's a rare break in the Republican party, this is a poll and chance for people on the right especially to discuss.

 

[PeshakJang]

What is the logic in reducing our nuclear armament, while essentially ignoring hostile nations' intents to build them? How would this effectively make us safer?

 

[EagleKeeper]

And the opponents are stating why?

Is it because of Obama or is there another reason?

Please provide the rest of the story?

 

[drebo]

Castrating ourselves to satiate a 20-year-dead enmity with the Russians is stupid. The Russians are not hostile toward us and we are not hostile toward them. Moreover, there are far more pressing threats in the world than ancient Russian missiles.

I would prefer to see the US "suggest" to the Russians that it would be a good idea if they dismantled some of their weaponry. But, by dismantling our own weaponry, we are simply making ourselves an easier target to other hostile and potentially hostile nations.

 

[fskimospy]

What is the logic in reducing our nuclear armament, while essentially ignoring hostile nations' intents to build them? How would this effectively make us safer?

Because it helps us get Russian aid against Iran and allows us to continue verification and inspection on Russian systems and warheads, something that we consider vital for national security. Can you detail to us how the US will be less safe with a limit if 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads than we are currently? (not to mention all the thousands of warheads we have in storage)

In addition, it has broad public support along with the unanimous support of all branches of military service. This is a no-brainer.

 

[sunzt]

so how many nukes will we have left with this treaty? Only a couple hundred or so i'm guessing?

 

[Moonbeam]

And the opponents are stating why?

Is it because of Obama or is there another reason?

Please provide the rest of the story?

You are not aware that every evil mind has a rationalization for what they do that is based on sound moral principles? Surely you know what those lies are, do you not, and can list them for us?

I know for example, that when I need to make changes in my life I don't want to, I propose the notion that I need more time to study them, or that they are not just the changes I recommended at a different point in time when those changes were more flattering to my ego. Surely you know the routine, no?

 

[drebo]

You are not aware that every evil mind has a rationalization for what they do that is based on sound moral principles?

You should tell that to the appologists in the TSA threads.

 

[fskimospy]

so how many nukes will we have left with this treaty? Only a couple hundred or so i'm guessing?

More than a thousand, 1,550 to be exact, and thousands more in storage.

Can anyone come up with a plausible scenario where 1,550 nukes are not enough to defend ourselves? (hopefully a scenario where we aren't all dead)

 

[Moonbeam]

What is the logic in reducing our nuclear armament, while essentially ignoring hostile nations' intents to build them? How would this effectively make us safer?

These are complicated ideas that demand sophisticated thinking.

The primitive reptilian part of the brain insists he eat the smaller lizard, not knowing it itself is somewhere a smaller lizard. In the reptile world it's every lizard for himself. Over and above this brain that controls the militaristic marching moron is a mammalian brain, the origin and source of emotional caring and cooperative offspring rearing, where creatures work together for mutual benefit. And above that is the human brain capable of cognitive thinking and future planning and predicting. The use of these two second parts of the brain which you do not access are requisite in any real answer to your question which, if fear, will leave you puzzling in the dark as to how treaties can make us safer because all a reptile can ever see is other reptiles.

 

[rudder]

And the opponents are stating why?

Is it because of Obama or is there another reason?

Please provide the rest of the story?

Ditto. The OP does nothing by presenting a simple poll without discussing the reasons behind the opposition. He needs to give us some details of what the republicans oppose in the treaty.

 

[Moonbeam]

You should tell that to the appologists in the TSA threads.

I told you and we can now see what little good it did. First thing you did on reading it was to do it too. "I don't need to look at how I rationalize my evil because there guy over there is rationalizing his."

Who are the moral teachers of the world. Folk who practice it and lead by example, or folk who rationalize their evil? Yup, you got's ta carry a cross if you want to lead. You gotta be big, and big emotionally, not like a lizard.

 

[lothar]

My only issue on the treaty is the Russian signing statement.

 

[Moonbeam]

Ditto. The OP does nothing by presenting a simple poll without discussing the reasons behind the opposition. He needs to give us some details of what the republicans oppose in the treaty.

You got a broken arm?

 

[Moonbeam]

My only issue on the treaty is the Russian signing statement.

What, you need a treaty with your Mother?

 

[Scotteq]

Craig Thread....


Moonbeam Spam...



Prediction: Nothing of value will be accomplished here.

 

[lothar]

What, you need a treaty with your Mother?

Russia pulled a "Bush" signing statement on the treaty.
If their "Bush" signing statement means that we are free to do the same if they decide to exit the START treaty, then I see absolutely no reason why there should be opposition to this.

If it doesn't however and leaves us castrated while the Russians are free to do what they want, then I can see why there could be opposition to this.

I support Dick Lugar's opinion on this. Hopefully Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, Bob Corker, George Vionovich, Judd Gregg, and any other moderate Republicans will join him.

 

[EagleKeeper]

And the opponents are stating why?

Is it because of Obama or is there another reason?

Please provide the rest of the story?

You are not aware that every evil mind has a rationalization for what they do that is based on sound moral principles? Surely you know what those lies are, do you not, and can list them for us?

I know for example, that when I need to make changes in my life I don't want to, I propose the notion that I need more time to study them, or that they are not just the changes I recommended at a different point in time when those changes were more flattering to my ego. Surely you know the routine, no?

This is Craig that started the thread with only half the story presented - his half.

I would like to know what he chose to leave out?
Asking why will not accomplish anything - it would be classified as "irelevant"

 

[crownjules]

What is the logic in reducing our nuclear armament, while essentially ignoring hostile nations' intents to build them? How would this effectively make us safer?

What's the harm in getting rid of a few of them and the operational/maintenance costs associated with keeping them just sitting in their bays? They're effectiveness is mostly as a deterrent and we have more than enough to serve that purpose. Should we actually need to irradiate the planet, our current inventory allows us to do that many times over. There's no need to keep that many.

 

[Skitzer]

There is strong Republican opposition to the renewal of the START treaty Obama negotiated.

There is some breaking in the ranks, with Sen. Lugar expressing anger at the Republicans who are opposed to and delaying the approval.

Supporters say the treaty is important at preventing proliferation, and that Republican opposition is nothing more than extremism in opposing Obama on anything.

Given the importance of the issue and how it's a rare break in the Republican party, this is a poll and chance for people on the right especially to discuss.

Got a link or is this your own personal dissertation?
Who are you quoting if anyone?

 

[spidey07]

I'd say given the recent development with Iran and NK we need MORE nuclear weapons, not less. Republicans are staying true to protecting this great nation while Obama seeks to weaken it. FBHO.

 

[Scotteq]

I'd say given the recent development with Iran and NK we need MORE nuclear weapons, not less. Republicans are staying true to protecting this great nation while Obama seeks to weaken it. FBHO.

I can see modernizing and replacing. Even if only for safety reasons, given the age of the current arsenal. i.e. Replace the Liquid fuelled rockets entirely with more modern solid designs. Disassemble the old warheads and reprocess the material, etc..

But as a general rule: I firmly believe we have more than enough already. Especially given that our Submarine arm could destroy the planet without anyone else's "assistance", and they can't be targeted preemtively.

 

[Moonbeam]

This is Craig that started the thread with only half the story presented - his half.

I would like to know what he chose to leave out?
Asking why will not accomplish anything - it would be classified as "irelevant"

I suggested you know what was left out.

 

[rudeguy]

please add "this is 100% a distraction designed to divert public attention from real issues" to the poll.

 

[Moonbeam]

On Capitol Hill, Republican opposition is rooted in varying arguments: doubts about the strength of verification procedures, concerns about whether the treaty would limit U.S. missile defense options, skepticism about whether the Senate can squeeze a vote into a packed, final legislative session.

Looming over all that is the prospect that Republicans, still basking in election victories, could deny the president a major foreign policy victory.
---------------

Some of the bull shit and the truth.

It must be wonderful to know that your party puts politics above national security interests. Republicans are fucking swine, the party of human garbage.