Why are the Republicans stopping START??

[L.K.Eder]

yeah, amazing. one only need to read the first page of the 17 page pdf to find the connection between the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons of 1968 and START.

or listen to what the senators said who voted for it in committee.

or use your brain.

START supports NNPT.

START only impacts the NNPT if Russia decides not to help Iran develop nuclear power. How well is that working again?

and that is not binding btw either ......

trajan & windbag.

bluster & naught.

 

[Trajan]

START only impacts the NNPT if Russia decides not to help Iran develop nuclear power. How well is that working again?

and that is not binding btw either ......

trajan & windbag.

bluster & naught.

wow, am I impressed, what grasp of detail, I am overwhelmed, ...you are on it man...great post...you've convinced me.

for someone who engages in their fair share of ad homs, talking of naught.

 

[L.K.Eder]

and that is not binding btw either ......

trajan & windbag.

bluster & naught.

wow, am I impressed, what grasp of detail, I am overwhelmed, ...you are on it man...great post...you've convinced me.

for someone who engages in their fair share of ad homs, talking of naught.

yeah, it was a weak one, sorry about that.

i put enough into this thread, i will not rehash this for every retard that shows up.

 

[code1211]

The world’s nuclear wannabes, starting with Iran, should send a thank you note to Senator Jon Kyl. After months of negotiations with the White House, he has decided to try to block the lame-duck Senate from ratifying the New Start arms control treaty
The treaty is so central to this country’s national security, and the objections from Mr. Kyl — and apparently the whole Republican leadership — are so absurd that the only explanation is their limitless desire to deny President Obama any legislative success.

The Republicans like to claim that they are the party of national security. We can only hope that other senators in the party will decide that the nation’s security interests must trump political maneuvering.

Accepting once again that facts should never stand in the way of a firm opinion, what might Iran have to do with this treaty?

This is a treaty between Russia and the USA.

Clinton calls for Senate to act on nuclear treaty - Yahoo! News

The treaty would reduce U.S. and Russian limits on strategic warheads to 1,550 for each country from the current ceiling of 2,200. It also would set up new procedures to allow both countries to inspect each other's arsenals to verify compliance.

 

[Trajan]

trajan & windbag.

bluster & naught.

wow, am I impressed, what grasp of detail, I am overwhelmed, ...you are on it man...great post...you've convinced me.

for someone who engages in their fair share of ad homs, talking of naught.

yeah, it was a weak one, sorry about that.

i put enough into this thread, i will not rehash this for every retard that shows up.

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

 

[L.K.Eder]

wow, am I impressed, what grasp of detail, I am overwhelmed, ...you are on it man...great post...you've convinced me.

for someone who engages in their fair share of ad homs, talking of naught.

yeah, it was a weak one, sorry about that.

i put enough into this thread, i will not rehash this for every retard that shows up.

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

wow, a "no, you". i am wounded.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

 

[Trajan]

yeah, it was a weak one, sorry about that.

i put enough into this thread, i will not rehash this for every retard that shows up.

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

wow, a "no, you". i am wounded.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

sure will, first, I thought you would appreciate this..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as1cTOx8Hrk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[L.K.Eder]

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

wow, a "no, you". i am wounded.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

sure will, first, I thought you would appreciate this..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as1cTOx8Hrk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

i rarely watch youtube videos on this board. they are usually posted by idiots, conspiracy theorists, and more idiots.

if you want to slam me, give it some effort, slacker.

 

[Trajan]

yeah, it was a weak one, sorry about that.

i put enough into this thread, i will not rehash this for every retard that shows up.

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

okay I did.......and?????

 

[L.K.Eder]

oh hey, don't worry we'll be here for you when you return.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

okay I did.......and?????

it was another example of a retard showing up repeating the same old bullshit, that has been addressed already on the same thread.

the window is closing.

do you have another very serious question to ask, serious poster?

 

[MaggieMae]

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?

They're going to bleed the last of their just-say-no power until January, that's why. It's all politics. If an arms treaty gets signed with Russia, it will be the first one accomplished by a DEMOCRATIC adminisration. Oh the horror.

 

[Trajan]

wow, a "no, you". i am wounded.

look at what code12232323 just posted.

sure will, first, I thought you would appreciate this..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as1cTOx8Hrk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

i rarely watch youtube videos on this board. they are usually posted by idiots, conspiracy theorists, and more idiots.

if you want to slam me, give it some effort, slacker.

it was a joke, notice the emoticons below? buy a sense of humor or get your diaper changed Mr. Haughty, for god sakes...

 

[L.K.Eder]

sure will, first, I thought you would appreciate this..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as1cTOx8Hrk&feature=player_embedded

i rarely watch youtube videos on this board. they are usually posted by idiots, conspiracy theorists, and more idiots.

if you want to slam me, give it some effort, slacker.

it was a joke, notice the emoticons below? buy a sense of humor or get your diaper changed Mr. Haughty, for god sakes...

emoticons are abused all the time on this board, masking a really nasty slam with a .

so forgive me when i don't take your emoticons as indication for your intention.

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

It's the same damned agreement that existed until it expired last December!!!!!!!! The only difference is there are added verifications. Geezus, pay attention, people.

The original START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) agreement between the United States and Russia expired on December 5, 2009. The treaty was originally negotiated in the 1980s and early 1990s under Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush's presidencies, and it was ratified in the U.S. Senate in 1992.

The treaty allowed for inspections and information sharing between the U.S. and Russia for verification purposes. It also allowed for no more than 6,000 deployed nuclear weapons and no more than 1,600 delivery systems for each country. With the expiration of the treaty in December, the verification procedures also expired, making it necessary that the New START treaty be ratified as soon as possible, if verification were to continue.

Details of the new START follow-on agreement

As in the original START agreement, verification is a crucial element of the New START treaty. Many of the verification methods in the original treaty will be continued. Improved verification methods will be added. Examples of improved verification methods are information sharing regarding missile tests and on the ground inspections. It does not limit missile shield systems in either country.
...
The New START treaty has strong bipartisan support. Various foreign policy experts support the agreement, including former Secretary of State George Schultz, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn, former national security advisor Brent Scowcroft, and former START negotiator Ambassador Linton Brooks

 

[MaggieMae]

Bad treaty=blocked by the GOP.

Yet another great move by the resurgent GOP to block the radical left agenda. They prove themselves every day. Let's see how long they can continue.

These are all cold war experts, stupid. START treaties played a major role in ending detente, stupid. That was a Ronald Reagan accomplishment, stupid.

The New START treaty has strong bipartisan support. Various foreign policy experts support the agreement, including former Secretary of State George Schultz, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn, former national security advisor Brent Scowcroft, and former START negotiator Ambassador Linton Brooks

 

[rightwinger]

The world’s nuclear wannabes, starting with Iran, should send a thank you note to Senator Jon Kyl. After months of negotiations with the White House, he has decided to try to block the lame-duck Senate from ratifying the New Start arms control treaty
The treaty is so central to this country’s national security, and the objections from Mr. Kyl — and apparently the whole Republican leadership — are so absurd that the only explanation is their limitless desire to deny President Obama any legislative success.

The Republicans like to claim that they are the party of national security. We can only hope that other senators in the party will decide that the nation’s security interests must trump political maneuvering.

Accepting once again that facts should never stand in the way of a firm opinion, what might Iran have to do with this treaty?

This is a treaty between Russia and the USA.

Clinton calls for Senate to act on nuclear treaty - Yahoo! News

The treaty would reduce U.S. and Russian limits on strategic warheads to 1,550 for each country from the current ceiling of 2,200. It also would set up new procedures to allow both countries to inspect each other's arsenals to verify compliance.

What it has to do with Iran is it allows them to call us a bunch of hypocrites for demanding they stop developing nukes while refusing an offer to reduce our own

 

[Trajan]

i rarely watch youtube videos on this board. they are usually posted by idiots, conspiracy theorists, and more idiots.

if you want to slam me, give it some effort, slacker.

it was a joke, notice the emoticons below? buy a sense of humor or get your diaper changed Mr. Haughty, for god sakes...

emoticons are abused all the time on this board, masking a really nasty slam with a .

so forgive me when i don't take your emoticons as indication for your intention.

okay so U tube is out, you don't buy into emoticon expression, FFS, I need an instruction manual when I post you? anything else? are you cool with my font?

 

[Trajan]

The world’s nuclear wannabes, starting with Iran, should send a thank you note to Senator Jon Kyl. After months of negotiations with the White House, he has decided to try to block the lame-duck Senate from ratifying the New Start arms control treaty
The treaty is so central to this country’s national security, and the objections from Mr. Kyl — and apparently the whole Republican leadership — are so absurd that the only explanation is their limitless desire to deny President Obama any legislative success.

The Republicans like to claim that they are the party of national security. We can only hope that other senators in the party will decide that the nation’s security interests must trump political maneuvering.

Accepting once again that facts should never stand in the way of a firm opinion, what might Iran have to do with this treaty?

This is a treaty between Russia and the USA.

Clinton calls for Senate to act on nuclear treaty - Yahoo! News

The treaty would reduce U.S. and Russian limits on strategic warheads to 1,550 for each country from the current ceiling of 2,200. It also would set up new procedures to allow both countries to inspect each other's arsenals to verify compliance.

What it has to do with Iran is it allows them to call us a bunch of hypocrites for demanding they stop developing nukes while refusing an offer to reduce our own

here he is!!!!!! thx bro, you're back!!I have missed you.

so the 3000 some odd we have reduced, that was what? peanuts? and frankly worrying about what the midget in iran says means exactly squat to me. Hes a treaty barometer we should be worried about now?

 

[MaggieMae]

It's about stopping Obama: The GOP's stated concerns are so absurd that the only explanation is their limitless desire to deny President Obama any legislative success," says The New York Times in an editorial. A failure to ratify this treaty would damage U.S. credibility overseas and undermine America's ability to pressure Iran on its illicit nuclear program. Surely "the nation's security interests must trump political maneuvering."

There are a couple things to do before the end of the year. If there was a budget, something the Dems never got around to passing during the fiasco that has been the last two years, that would reduce the need for a contionuing resolution and if the Dimbulbs hadn't run up a couple trillion in extra debt, the debt ceiling might not be so real important, either.

As it is, the government shuts down on December 3.

The START Treaty was signed when? Why was it it absolutely not important until now and suddenly it's front and center.

This whole fluff is grandstanding partisan hackery at its most pronounced. Do the work of the people and leave the stupidity of the the Big 0 until there's time to address it with reasonable diliberation.

Is this another one where we need to pass it to find out what's in it?

Sure, let's pay Congress for a month to sit around and twiddle their thumbs and do nothing. There are any number of things that are urgent, but which party has played the obstructionist role on almost all of them? START has been dangling for a year now, and it needs to be renewed. End of story. Current Republicans are looking pretty stupid by obstructing this one.

 

[MaggieMae]

Did the lame duck congress under President Bush take a 2 month holiday?

Did they pass legislation THIS HUGE ?????

NO THEY DIDNT!

Renewing START doesn't need to be rewritten as a whole new agreement. It's the same agreement that has been renegotiated at least three times, and this one doesn't have any arguable surprises. Why don't you idiots do some background fact-checking for once in your sorry lives before you just start spewing your anti-everything horseshit?