Why are the Republicans stopping START??

[Capitalist]

Why should we trust a POTUS that in his own words says: “That was my goal. Every once in a while, I do things right.”
BTW
What happened to the laser like focus on jobs and the economy. Just askin'..........

 

[The T]

Why should we trust a POTUS that in his own words says: “That was my goal. Every once in a while, I do things right.”
BTW
What happened to the laser like focus on jobs and the economy. Just askin'..........

yeah...that's why he settled for a "Base Hit" instead of a HOME RUN at the G20 Summit...when South Korea snubbed him...and expects us to swallow our diminished status in the world.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

No Rubber Stamp on this one. The Democrats should actually support the Republicans on this.

 

[Capitalist]

I just called my Rep. and told him that I'm all for it.
As long as we don't need to make any promises about missile defense or that it limits Americas strategic options with all our enemies.
Hmmmmmmmm.
I wonder if the treaty restricts us from developing further, or fielding already developed, ABM technology such as the airborne laser system.
I wonder............

 

[The T]

No Rubber Stamp on this one. The Democrats should actually support the Republicans on this.

They should since this treaty does not address Defense versus offense.

As I posted earlier? The sore spot does not address IRAN...or North Korea...and response if they should launch a bone headed move to launch rogue weapons...

Oddly? Russia supports both countries with thier endeavours.

This should be stopped dead in it's tracks.

 

[Capitalist]

No Rubber Stamp on this one. The Democrats should actually support the Republicans on this.

But they can read it later.........

 

[Rinata]

Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week

Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?

What is behind anything they do is President Obama. They want him to fail. That is the only thing I think they consider on any issue. They said they're main goal was going to be to undo everything he has done and to reject anything else that he tries to do.

I don't understand how anybody voted for these idiots. Very curious.

 

[JBeukema]

To those saying it doesn't include enough in the way of inspections: where is your alternative for consideration?

 

[Rinata]

Why should we have a lame duck Senate vote on it when we can have our newly elected Senate actually debate it before we do anything?

Seems kind of stupid to rush something this significant through. I said that with Healthcare too. And we all know how bad that turned out.

A lot of people do not feel that way. Speak for yourself please.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

So just Rubber Stamp it because the Democrats and the President say so? Sorry not buying that stuff. This is not something this Lame Duck Congress should be deciding. It can wait. The Democrats of all people should be supporting the Republicans on that Rubber Stamping stuff. I think they should take their time on this.

 

[JBeukema]

So just Rubber Stamp it because the Democrats and the President say so? .

You're the only one saying any such thing

 

[LibocalypseNow]

So just Rubber Stamp it because the Democrats and the President say so? .

You're the only one saying any such thing

Not so. All Democrats on this thread are demanding the Republicans just hurry up and Rubber Stamp this. You just choose not to see this. I hope the Republicans hold firm and delay this until January. That would be the right thing to do.

 

[The T]

So just Rubber Stamp it because the Democrats and the President say so? .

You're the only one saying any such thing

Not so. All Democrats on this thread are demanding the Republicans just hurry up and Rubber Stamp this. You just choose not to see this. I hope the Republicans hold firm and delay this until January. That would be the right thing to do.

Agreed.

 

[JBeukema]

So just Rubber Stamp it because the Democrats and the President say so? .

You're the only one saying any such thing

Not so. All Democrats on this thread are demanding the Republicans just hurry up and Rubber Stamp this. You just choose not to see this. I hope the Republicans hold firm and delay this until January. That would be the right thing to do.

Wow.. y'all live in your own world, don't you?

You keep setting deadlines and then, when those deadlines pass, making new ones. Not till after the midterms, now not until the new congress, then not til... when?

The treaty is up to be read, we've got generals and other foreign policy experts giving their support, and you offer no alternatives or meaningful objections.

All you do is scream 'NO!'

like a damned two-year-old

 

[LibocalypseNow]

You're the only one saying any such thing

Not so. All Democrats on this thread are demanding the Republicans just hurry up and Rubber Stamp this. You just choose not to see this. I hope the Republicans hold firm and delay this until January. That would be the right thing to do.

Wow.. y'all live in your own world, don't you?

You keep setting deadlines and then, when those deadlines pass, making new ones. Not till after the midterms, now not until the new congress, then not til... when?

The treaty is up to be read, we've got generals and other foreign policy experts giving their support, and you offer no alternatives or meaningful objections.

All you do is scream 'NO!'

like a damned two-year-old

Oh so the Republicans should just cave and hurry up and Rubber Stamp this huh? Man you Democrats really are a joke. Now you're all for Rubber Stamping. I have no problem with the Republicans taking their time on this. This is no "Crisis." See ya in January.

 

[JBeukema]

1)only you speak of rubber stamping anything

2)I'm not a Democrat

 

[Capitalist]

Wall Street Journal:

Senators will also have to assess the treaty itself, and there are serious concerns.
First, it's not clear that the treaty's verification provisions are adequate. Second, the treaty's failure to take into account Russia's enormous tactical nuclear weapons arsenal (more than 10 times larger than that of the U.S.) and the limitations it places on U.S. conventional global strike capabilities are serious flaws. Third, the treaty links missile defense to strategic arms reduction--a linkage that had been wisely broken by the Bush administration.
The administration accepted treaty language that will help the Russians argue that the U.S. should cut back development of defenses against ballistic missiles. This is worrisome less because of the explicit limitations on missile defense than because Mr. Obama has repeatedly shown weak support for U.S. missile defense. For this reason and others, senators have asked the administration to open up the negotiating record. They rightly want to understand what concessions the administration made and received.
​

 

[Flopper]

to an extent that is true, as always. Are you sure its in our best interests?

Unless you are have been involved in the negotiations and have detail knowledge of the processes you can not know what is best for the country. You really need to listen to the authorities, past and present secretaries of state, the DOD, and others who have been working with the process for 20 years. Armchair quarterbacking just doesn't work. All treaties have have pros and cons for both sides since it is a mutual negotiated agreement.

In effect *YOU* are telling that poster that his government has to do what's best for the protection of he, his family, and fellow citizens is none of his business?

REALLY?

Well, it is the job of government to do what is best for it's citizens. I can understand why the Right would want to block the tax bill or gays in military, but blocking the treaty is dumb. It has been approved by Democrats and Republicans. Bush signed off on this in 1993. It is has been approved by both Republican and Democrat Secretaries of State as well as the DOD. The Republican opposition has nothing to do with the contents of the treaty. In fact, I doubt that there is a single Republican in Senate that is really against the treaty.

START II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I love it! "DA BOOOOOSH even likes this Treaty." Yea and so what? Since when are all you Dems so quick to cheerlead for anything DA BOOOOOOSH liked? If DA BOOOOSH and the Democrats agree on this,i'm even more skeptical. Now i know we're being screwed. Yikes!

 

[Flopper]

No Rubber Stamp on this one. The Democrats should actually support the Republicans on this.

They should since this treaty does not address Defense versus offense.

As I posted earlier? The sore spot does not address IRAN...or North Korea...and response if they should launch a bone headed move to launch rogue weapons...

Oddly? Russia supports both countries with thier endeavours.

This should be stopped dead in it's tracks.

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.