The START treaty with Russia has too many flaws to be agreed to. It is one sided and diminishes our national security. Call your senator and tell them to vote no 202-224-3121.
(CNSNews.com) – "The U.S. Senate looks poised to begin debate Wednesday on the Obama administration's controversial nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia.
Critics say a vote on New START, if successful, would be the first time the Senate has given its advice and consent to the ratification of a major treaty during a lame-duck session."
13 former Senators urge Reid, McConnell to postpone deliberations on New START treaty.
usACTIONnews.com -
The START treaty with Russia has too many flaws to be agreed to. It is one sided and diminishes our national security. Call your senator and tell them to vote no 202-224-3121.
One of the main problems with the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is that for the first time it gives in to the Russian idea that missile defense is linked to offensive weapons. This is a major concession to Russia that Obama has made effectively giving Russia veto power to our growing a defensive missile shield at a time when more nations such as Iran, china and North Korea are developing long range missiles.
The treaty also prohibits our converting missile silos and missile launching submarines as launch platforms for defensive missiles. This would take a potential defensive option off the table and require us to try to eliminate inbound missiles closer to home.
Most disturbing is language in the treaty that creates an unaccountable commission called the Bilateral Consultative Commission (BCC). This commission follows the Obama pattern of bypassing authority of congress and allowing unelected bureaucrats the power to actually change definitions and agreed statements in the treaty. In effect, this would mean that after the treaty is ratified its entire meaning could be changed without congressional approval. What utter nonsense.
At least the Republicans have offered a change that would prohibit a the U.S.-Russian panel established in the treaty from forging side agreements on missile defenses but is that enough? If the panel still has the authority to massage a few meanings or agreements in other areas without senate consent it becomes a discussion of what the meaning of is is.
The new treaty does not require Russia to make any substantive changes. Due to aging of its systems the Russians are already self limiting to the treaty numbers. The US will effectively be making unilateral reductions and get nothing in return.
The treaty also allows the Russians to maintain a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear weapons.
The treaty treats multiple warhead bombers as one warhead. The Russians are developing a long range bomber program. As the US aging fleet of bombers is retired the Russians can exceed the 1,550 limits by deploying multiple warhead bombers. Rail based systems are also excluded. By launching from rail platforms additional warheads would be totally exempt.
This START treaty is a major victory for the Russians. There are many more reasons that this treaty is bad for the US. Read the articles below and then CALL YOUR SENATOR! 202-224-3121
~ Michael Whipple, Editor usACTIONnews.com
RELATED ARTICLES:
Still a Non-Starter
Iran Placing Medium-Range Missiles in Venezuela; Can Reach the U.S.
Another shoe drops on New START
Obama's time-warp focus on the New START treaty
Obama attempts to con Israel supporters to pass START
This New START Is A Bad Deal At Any Time
Will Republicans trade a bad START for temporary tax cuts?
Fox All-Stars on why the START treaty is bad for America
Media Heavily Invested in New Start Treaty
GOP senator cites new intel, won't back New START
Obama Administration Steps Up Push for 'Lame Duck' Ratification of Arms Control Deal
Obama shows priorities – pushes trophy START treaty ahead of jobs, economy, tax cuts
CNSNews.com article – Obama Administration Steps Up Push for 'Lame Duck' Ratification of Arms Control Deal
Essential Issues Must Be Addressed Before New START Is Taken Up in the Senate
Sen. Kyl Makes it Hard for Obama to Pass START Treaty
False START
START of a lame duck?
Lame START
Don't Rush New START
Obama, Clinton, Gates Pushing for 'Lame-Duck' Ratification of New Arms-Reduction Treaty
Lobbying battle over START treaty heats up over weeklong recess
START: Obama's worst foreign-policy mistake
Senate needs to stop START
BOLTON: Folding our nuclear umbrella
Kill the Treaty
Reducing American Nuclear Strength Will Trigger Rogue Nuclear Build Up
Gaffney: Obama Nuclear Plan Takes 'Dangerous' Risks with U.S. Security
False START -did Obama give away to much in Russian nuclear deal?
Off to a bad START – Romney gives 8 reasons to reject
New START Treaty's Swiss-Cheese Verification Trap
Interview with John Wohlstetter Sr. Fellow at Discovery Institute
New START and Obama's Mysterious Trip to Russia
Sent from my iPhone
No comments:
Post a Comment