I don't there are allot of Blue Dog Dems and Hawk Dem who are against some of these cuts.Beside it won't make it to either the Sen. or House til after the Mid Term elections and I really don't think the Dems are keep control of both side nor do I think they will have the vote to keep it outof sub-committee.
Last edited by Kandahar; 07-10-09 at 10:58 PM.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
RealClearPolitics - Our Foreign Policy NeophyteOur Foreign Policy Neophyte
By Charles Krauthammer
WASHINGTON -- The signing ceremony in Moscow was a grand affair. For Barack Obama, foreign policy neophyte and "reset" man, the arms reduction agreement had a Kissingerian air. A fine feather in his cap. And our president likes his plumage.
Unfortunately for the United States, the country Obama represents, the prospective treaty is useless at best, detrimental at worst.
Useless because the level of offensive nuclear weaponry, the subject of the U.S.-Russia "Joint Understanding," is an irrelevance. We could today terminate all such negotiations, invite the Russians to build as many warheads as they want, and profitably watch them spend themselves into penury, as did their Soviet predecessors, stockpiling weapons that do nothing more than, as Churchill put it, make the rubble bounce.
Obama says that his START will be a great boon, setting an example to enable us to better pressure North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear programs. That a man of Obama's intelligence can believe such nonsense is beyond comprehension. There is not a shred of evidence that cuts by the great powers -- the INF treaty, START I, the Treaty of Moscow (2002) -- induced the curtailment of anyone's programs. Moammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes the week we pulled Saddam Hussein out of his spider hole. No treaty involved. The very notion that Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will suddenly abjure nukes because of yet another U.S.-Russian treaty is comical.
The pursuit of such an offensive weapons treaty could nonetheless be detrimental to us. Why? Because Obama's hunger for a diplomatic success, such as it is, allowed the Russians to exact a price: linkage between offensive and defensive nuclear weapons.
This is important for Russia because of the huge American technological advantage in defensive weaponry. We can reliably shoot down an intercontinental ballistic missile. They cannot. And since defensive weaponry will be the decisive strategic factor of the 21st century, Russia has striven mightily for a quarter-century to halt its development. Gorbachev tried to swindle Reagan out of the Strategic Defense Initiative at Reykjavik in 1986. Reagan refused. As did his successors -- Bush I, Clinton, Bush II.
Obama, who seeks to banish nuclear weapons entirely, has little use for such prosaic contrivances. First, the Obama budget actually cuts spending on missile defense, at a time when federal spending is a riot of extravagance and trillion-dollar deficits. Then comes the "pause" (as Russia's president appreciatively noted) in the planned establishment of a missile shield in Eastern Europe. And now the "Joint Understanding" commits us to a new treaty that includes "a provision on the interrelationship of strategic offensive and strategic defensive arms." Obama further said that the East European missile shield "will be the subject of extensive negotiations" between the United States and Russia.
Obama doesn't even seem to understand the ramifications of this concession. Poland and the Czech Republic thought they were regaining their independence when they joined NATO under the protection of the United States. They now see that the shield negotiated with us and subsequently ratified by all of NATO is in limbo. Russia and America will first have to "come to terms" on the issue, explained President Dmitry Medvedev. This is precisely the kind of compromised sovereignty that Russia wants to impose on its ex-Soviet colonies -- and that U.S. presidents of both parties for the last 20 years have resisted.
Resistance, however, is not part of Obama's repertoire. Hence his eagerness for arcane negotiations over MIRV'd missiles, the perfect distraction from the major issue between the two countries: Vladimir Putin's unapologetic and relentless drive to restore Moscow's hegemony over the sovereign states that used to be Soviet satrapies.
That -- not nukes -- is the chief cause of the friction between the U.S. and Russia. You wouldn't know it to hear Obama in Moscow pledging to halt the "drift" in U.S.-Russian relations. Drift? The decline in relations came from Putin's desire to undo what he considers "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the 20th century -- the collapse of the Soviet empire. Hence his squeezing Ukraine's energy supplies. His overt threats against Poland and the Czech Republic for daring to make sovereign agreements with the United States. And finally, less than a year ago, his invading a small neighbor, detaching and then effectively annexing two of Georgia's provinces to Mother Russia.
That's the cause of the collapse of our relations. Not drift, but aggression. Or, as the reset man referred to it with such delicacy in his Kremlin news conference: "our disagreements on Georgia's borders."
What'd have been the right thing for Obama to do, though? I don't think you're wrong - the article as some really good points - but I'm just wondering what specifically Obama should have done? Doesn't establishing democratic dies BEFORE fighting aggression with more aggression help more than the other way around?
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me."
-Dudley Field Malone
He should definately not have put on the table a strategic defense system in exchange for a strategic weapons system.
Especially when Russia has nothing like our ABM technology.
Putin got him not only to agree to ut that n the table but pause deployment of it.
Obama should have said the USA will agree to arms reduction of mutual weapons systems...we will not trade our advanced ABM system for Russian ICBM's.
Poland, Czech Republic, ROmania, Hungary..are al a lil nervous now..they expectes this system they negotiated with the USA on it for a year..and now Obam is basically putting it up for sale to their primary threat Russia.
Ukrainian Leaders probably ulcers now.
What else will he sell?
..he seems open to more doesn't he.
How about the Crimea for a singing ceremony and a speech?
Reagan had talks with the Soviets while he was working openly to destroy them. He agreed to arms cuts etc..but he as Bush as Clinton as Bush made clear whenever the ABM stuff came up that No we are not trading that for that..period.
Obama has changed that to oh we might trade it.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATeKIufRnhc&feature=related"]YouTube - Czech President - Idealistic Socialism is Impossible[/ame]
For sure they do:
Presidential rating of Yuschenko [Ukrainian President] are no more than 5.2%, according to poll
Presidential rating of Yuschenko no more than 5.2%, according to poll
However, Mr. Putin does elicit confidence in the world’s two largest nations, China (64%) and India (65%). The public in Ukraine, where the current West-leaning President Yushchenko has had tense relations with the Kremlin, also has confidence in Putin (57 %); notably, more Ukrainians express confidence Putin than in President Obama (35%). Russians themselves have confidence in their Prime Minister by a very large majority (82%)
.UN Secretary-General receives second highest rating in poll assessing world leaders-United Nations in Ukraine
Go ahead, argue against Russians, but not strawmen:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfA5XfxQOPw"]YouTube - US hampering Russian peace efforts -- Putin[/ame]
1 against 5:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFMQz6AN3B0&feature=channel"]YouTube - Putin answers questions from Time magazine[/ame]
Last edited by justone; 07-13-09 at 11:16 PM.
Now remind everyone that your Russian and support Russian ambitions in Eastern Europe and the former Russian Empire.
Just so people know your intent and outlook.
First video does not discredit what I said. Czech Republic is seeing a year long negotiations put on the table by Obama..they can't be happy about that at all.
My remark about the Ukraine is in regards to the expansionistic intent of Russia towards their territory..not a meaningless popularity contest of polls.
He made a deal. He also put the ABM system up to negotiation.First of all, he didn't "concede" anything. No deal has been made.
USA does not need to negotiate our ABM systems.Second of all, if you aren't even willing to contemplate NEGOTIATING over American policies that concern Russia, why would you expect Russia to negotiate over THEIR policies that concern the United States?
It is not required of the USA to give out "presents" to talk...Obama needs to learn that.
Expect Obama to be pushed by Putin from now on..Putin has his number and plays this game like a pro.
I have nothing but respect for Putin..he is perhaps one of the greatest European leaders since Adolf Hitler and now he has his Neville Chamberlain.
Last edited by Triad; 07-14-09 at 01:19 AM.
Now remind everyone that you are Jew…
Now remind everyone that you are Chinese..
Now remind everyone that you are Irish Catholic…
You are like Tashah, not even a bit of shame or conscious.
In the Orwellian world Chech president talks about Obama. Get this – Chech president does not talk about Obama he talks about Putin and Russia. He points to the relentless bi-partisan propaganda insinuating that Russia dropped bombs on Georgia and he does not sleep well because of Russia. He himself says – it is an absurd, I sleep well, Russia does not bother me. Yet the propaganda says – it does not matter what you, Czech people or Ukrainian people or Russian people say and vote for, you don’t sleep well and we will keep on propping democracy in Ukraine and twisting your arms to make sure that you’d say that you don’t sleep well.
I guess, Russia cannot avoid a war or a series of wars against the US expansion. But you know what? As Russia was kicking Bush’s behind, it will be kicking Obama’s each and every time at each and every corner. Nothing has changed from the last time and nothing is going to change. For me as for an American it is humiliating to watch, all I have to remember that personally I have done all best to avoid the humiliation, I’ve tried even knowing that a$$holes cannot be reasoned, they have no shame not even conscious. I’ve tried.
Last edited by justone; 07-14-09 at 09:02 AM.