Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brad from Tennessee

Of course the Russians don’t see the need to renew the treaty. A treaty assumes you have to restrain yourself in order to have the assurances of the opposing party will observe similar restraints, and if that opposing party (the US under Obama) is going to unilaterally restrain itself (by unilaterally disarming) then why do something stupid like signing a treaty since it is just an unnecessary obligation?

If Obama is re-elected we are sooooo screwed!


62 posted on 10/11/2012 12:47:16 AM PDT by Wildbill22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Wildbill22; Brad from Tennessee
You make a good point: "if that opposing party (the US under Obama) is going to unilaterally restrain itself (by unilaterally disarming) then why do something stupid like signing a treaty."

An observation here: I'm old enough to remember when the stated goal of the left was "unilateral disarmament." The conservative response was to point out that the Soviets still retained an enormous and growing nuclear arsenal that needed to be countered. The left's reply was "if we disarm first, they won't have a need for it and they will disarm too! (Pass the reefer, will ya?)" Well, we have now mostly disamed, and guess what? The bear is building bombs and missiles like it's 1962 all over again.

The goal of the Left, and by extension their sock puppets the Democrats, has always been to leave the USA helpless before our enemies. They are about to get their wish.

82 posted on 10/11/2012 7:40:27 AM PDT by jboot (This isn't your father's America. Stay safe and keep your powder dry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson