START Treaty Up for Cliffhanger Vote in Senate

Is this another pass the bill without reading or truly understanding its contents. What is wrong with them? They are a danger to us.

Senate republicans are deliberately hurting the country by opposing everything Obama and democrats try to pass. Republicans have zero interest in the welfare of the country. They are power mad and will do absolutely anything to gain it. This treaty has been in effect sincve the Reagan Administration. But now, with the republicans having set their main goal to be bringing down Obama, they are opposting the treaty. For no other purpose than to oppose Obama. Mitch McConell is nothing less than a traitor.

EVERY former SECSTATE, Repubs and Dems, has endorsed this treaty. Former Republican SECDEFS (including Condoleeza Rice) support this treaty.The first Pres. Bush (who signed the Moscow Treaty, which is the precursor of THIS treaty) supports this treaty. Colin Powell supports this treaty. HENRY freaking KISSINGER supports this treaty. Almost every (respected and reputable) former Republican official supports passing this treaty.

Kissinger, George Schultz, James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger and Colin Powell ALL wrote a column called Why New START deserves Republican Support, here: http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/10514346/article-Why-New-START-deserves-Republican-support?instance=hs_guest_columnists

The first START treaty was signed by GW Bush. THIS is NEW START -- a continuation of the old START, seeking the same goals.

The ONLY reason Senate Republicans are opposing this VITAL treaty is because the Repub Leader, Mitch McConnell, wants to stop EVERY bill or action proposed by the President or Democratic legislators to deny them any legislative "victories", regardless of whether it compromises the safety of the country.

It is completely disgusting to see Republicans put national security at risk for political gamesmanship.

Dear Newsmax Reader:

The U.S. Senate likely will vote on the New START agreement today.

This is a dangerous treaty that should not be ratified.

Please read below the letter signed by 30 leading generals, diplomats and national security experts outlining these dangers.

Please call your U.S. Senator today at 202-224-3121 and urge them to vote “NO” to START.

Also, the following Senators have yet to make clear their intentions.

Please let them know you oppose START:

Sen. Robert Corker – Tenn.
Sen. Johnny Isakson – Ga.
Sen. John McCain – Ariz.
Sen. Robert Bennett – Ut.

Again, the Senate switchboard is 202-224-3121

Newsmax.com


Newsmax.com

Generals, Diplomats Warn of New START
More than 30 former defense or foreign policy government officials and related experts issued an open letter to the Senate Monday expressing their “professional judgment” that President Barack Obama’s proposed nuclear weapons reduction treaty with the Russians, called New START, “is not consistent with the national security interests of the United States,” and “should be rejected by the U.S. Senate,” which is considering it now.
They argue that Russia easily could cheat secretly to our detriment, that it would restrict deployment of new U.S. anti-missile defenses, that it would reduce the survivability and flexibility of our our strategic forces and could be militarily destabilizing, that it permits a continued large Russian superiority in overall nuclear weapons, and that resulting insecurity among our allies about continued extended deterrence could lead to intensified production and proliferation of nuclear weapons—all unintended, harmful consequences, the opposite of the Obama Administration’s announced goals for the agreement.
Among the many signers are: Ambassador Ed Rowny, former U.S. chief START negotiator; Vice Adm. Robert Monroe, U.S. Navy (Ret), former director, Defense Nuclear Agency; Judge William Clark, former national security adviser to President Reagan; Honorable Paula DeSutter, former assistant secretary of State for Verification, Compliance, and Implementation; Honorable Fred Ikle, former director, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Ambassador Read Hammer, former deputy director, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and former chief U.S. START Negotiator; Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerny, U.S. Air Force (Ret.), former deputy chief of staff; Ambassador John Bolton, former undersecretary of State for arms control and international security, and former U.S. ambassador to the U.N.; Ambassador Henry Cooper, former director, Strategic Defense Initiative of the Department of Defense, and former U.S. chief negotiator, Defense and Space Talks with the Soviet Union; and Hon. Edwin Meese, III, fomer counselor to the president and former U.S. attorney general.
More specifically, despite Obama administration claims to the contrary, the former officials and experts say that the proposed New START treaty has the following major problems, among others:
It would effectively limit further U.S. anti-missile defenses for the American homeland in the face of growing rogue nation/terrorist nuclear threats, saying “it would be folly to limit, let alone preclude, available options to do so” in the future.
It "is simply not adequately verifiable,” and “the Russians could engage in militarily significant violations with little fear of detection by the US,” with years being needed before we could respond adequately.
It “would reduce the survivability and flexibility of our (strategic) forces.”
Its low limits on the number of nuclear launchers could end up being militarily and strategically destabilizing;
It would solidify a large Russian superiority in nuclear weapons when considering its 10-to-1 advantage in tactical nuclear weapons, many of which have strategic capabilities and roles, and which have been termed an “urgent” problem by the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission.
It could force cuts in some of our vital conventional capabilities (i.e., heavy bombers) as well.
It would “create concerns” among our allies about America’s continuing extended deterrent capability to protect them, which could lead to “intensified proliferation” of nuclear weapons.
"It is unnecessary and ill-advised for the US to make these sorts of deep reductions in its strategic forces” so that the Russians are authorized/enabled to modernize and build up to our levels.
The statement closes by saying, “For all these reasons, we urge the members of the US Senate to resist pressure to consider the New START Treaty during the lame-duck session. The Senate should reject this accord and begin instead a long overdue and vitally needed process of modernization of the nuclear stockpile and refurbishment of the weapons complex that supports it. Only by taking such steps can we ensure that we will, in fact, have the 'safe, secure, and effective deterrent' that even President Obama says we will need for the foreseeable future.”

Once again typical republican hypocricy. They are totally against anything that obama wants to do even when it is good for the country. They have no concern for anything except bringing down our elected president even if it harms us. They claim that there was not enough time. Presumably they spent the last eight months chasing after bribes from their masters, the lobbyists and special interest groups.

The issue is not that Russia keeps the treaty; the issue is can we defend ourselves against them and others at all times. They aren't the only ones with nukes.

The US would be a sucker to ratify this treaty.

Before we sign anything check all treaties with Russia, have they held them up or broke their word.

The GOP has really become so incredibly petty. Someone should tell them to relax, they got the cuts for their "friends" and even a massive reduction in the estate tax so The Walmart clan can stash another 32 billion away. It's hysterical to watch the parody that is America these days. Reforming healthcare is "rammmed" down our throats but giving the already incredibly rich another Rolls Royce is a compromise. Lurking in the shadows yet another person who does not see the humor in this disgrace hits the thumbs down.

Politics you have to love it! Where else can you hire someone (public servant,public official) and they manage to get the employers(American citizens) to fight with each other over the employee telling the employer what they are going to do.