Posted on 04/08/2010 7:05:28 PM PDT by Abakumov
The Obama administration erred badly in announcing its new nuclear posture only days before the treaty signing, since this will frame the treaty-ratification debate. Senators will have legitimate concerns over how the treaty will be implemented within the new nuclear framework, especially since the strategic shift came after the treaty had been negotiated. The administration will have a hard time justifying the disconnects between treaty and strategy.
The treaty's warhead limit is a case in point. America will reduce its warhead stockpile, but the Obama administration has also unilaterally pledged not to modernize the U.S. nuclear force. This concession opens the possibility for Russia to achieve the kind of strategic technological surprise the Soviet Union did in the 1970s. The SALT I framework did not limit multiple warheads (MIRVs), in part because the United States felt it had an advantage in that technology. But the Soviet Union surprised America by swiftly developing superior MIRV capabilities in the 1970s, and within five years, the treaty had become a strategic liability enshrining Moscow's nuclear superiority.
Under the new treaty, the United States and Russia agree to limits in numbers of warheads, but only the United States has promised to freeze its technology. This is an open invitation to Russia to modernize its way to nuclear dominance.
The Obama administration is taking pains to point out th
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I'm guessing this is a tactic cooked up between the two men to look like they're doing something good for the planet and the anti-nuke crowd.
Convenient way to no longer pay for and maintain a lot of nukes.
IMO
What about Repubs. We have more 'stuff' flying out of this White House, faster than anyone can keep it to a single headline, for more than a few hours. (a tactic, for sure); but what are we going to do about this? Just lay down our Country - our future - give up the kids and all the past and current sacrifices by those in our Military to 'protect' us?
For what - to allow Obama to unravel our entire history and our future, by his treasonous Marxist-Islamist 'lights'?
What is the GOPs response? I cant find one anywhere !
They better move aggressively or they will be as obsolete as the Dems in NOV.
IMPEACH OBAMA!
Mass civil unrest is called for !
Is anyone organizing ? I there a leader stepping forward?
Well I read that Lex Lugar supports the treaty and will work with Kerry. WTF is going on!!!
We need to totally clean house in DC .All these bastards need to be thrown out . ALL
what an utterly stupid statement. You fix your mess up there in NJ and butt out of Alabama's business. Sessions is just fine with me.
Obama needs to surrender himself from the WH.
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.