New START Treaty

[baggygreen]

Just saw on the news (no link sorry, tv news), Big Barry O and Medvedev have just agreed to cut warheads by 1/3, whilst slashing all delivery systems - media's words, not mine - clarifying it by saying that they're going to drastically cut the number of missiles, bombers and missile subs.

Sounds like a bloody stupid idea to me...

[Jimbuna]

It's not as if Medvedev is even in charge over in Russia

[SteamWake]

Kumbya .. lets hold hands and skip through the green grass.

Kumbya .. lets hold hands and skip through the green grass.

Did you object to all the earlier versions of this treaty your government did?

It's not as if Medvedev is even in charge over in Russia

But apparently its not Obama in charg ein the US, he is just a puppet for an evil commymuslimatheist plot backed by a secret legion of nazi dentists.

[Catfish]

[Obama] "he is just a puppet for ..."

Now who IS he ?
A puppet, really ? For what i have read here, he must the incarnate devil himself. A little bit control on weapon and oil companies, a health care plane for "not well-off" people, an excuse to the first nations of the US - this man is the devil himself !
Or he is just hired by the Bush dynasty, to have an excuse for King Bush 3rd

Greetings,
Catfish

[Skybird]

reducing the number of warheads is nothing I have something to say against, both sides still are left with more warheads than enough. The US also plans to modernise existing systems, which effects the bombs stored in Europe, too.

The challenge of Iran and North Korea Obama has not answered by this.

To rule out atomic retaliation in case of attacks with biologic weapons, is questionable, imo, and not helpful. It can serve as an encouragement to strike with biologic weapons.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Kumbya .. lets hold hands and skip through the green grass.

good one sir. That is the Liberal mindset, void of reality.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

good one sir. That is the Liberal mindset, void of reality.

This from the guy who said Reagan was the best President over the last 150 years...

And speaking of Reagan...did you know he also wanted to reduce the nuke stockpile by 1/3? The Daily Show had a segment on it!!! With Reagan in video footage SAYING it!!

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

This from the guy who said Reagan was the best President over the last 150 years...

And speaking of Reagan...did you know he also wanted to reduce the nuke stockpile by 1/3? The Daily Show had a segment on it!!! With Reagan in video footage SAYING it!!

The fact that you would use The Daily Show as a reference in a non cmedy related discussion is because Stewart while funny(usually) is an idiot and the show is not a real news show as many in my generation seem to think.Can't tell you how many times in college I heard some idiot say well on the daily show, I usually set them straight on it, I hurt a few feelings to say that least.

The Cold War was a different situation than now.There were two super powers each operating on mutually assured destruction and reducing the warheads were a way to try to calm down things, but those days are over.Russia is not a super power but has plenty of nukes so good to try and balance things in that sense.However, several other nations have them or are in process of getting them and pose or will pose a threat so we should not reduce our deployed nukes while rest of the world is working on having more and more.Islamic terrorists are not the only threat, the traditional threat of unfriendly nations is still real and will be even more so in coming years, so we should not reduce our warheads or stop developing them to just "maintain" them, or we will end up with outdated equipment etc.Reagan too wanted a world without nukes and said so, most of us do but Reagan lived in the real world and knew it would not happen because you can not uninvent something.Obama really thinks by reducing our abilities and readiness, the world will follow our lead, take our hands and go play in the grassy field to watch the rainbows come out, the naivete is just stunning.

Reagan was the greatest President of last century and would dare say in the top five in history thus far for sure.I do believe it is time to add him to Mount Rushmore.Reagan turned things around economically, lowered taxes, took steps that allowed us to win the cold war and cause the collapse of the plague known as communism, he deserves credit for that because without him we would prob still be dicking around with them.Reagan revolutionized American politics, had fans on both sides of the aisle thus "Reagan Democrats" and left office with a 64% approval rating.Reagan also appointed brillant pro constitution judges like Scalia to supreme court and federal courts, a legacy that stands today, thanksfully.Overall, great President and no others really measure up.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by baggygreen

Just saw on the news (no link sorry, tv news), Big Barry O and Medvedev have just agreed to cut warheads by 1/3, whilst slashing all delivery systems - media's words, not mine - clarifying it by saying that they're going to drastically cut the number of missiles, bombers and missile subs.

Sounds like a bloody stupid idea to me...

Why? The US and Russia each got more warheads than all the other nuclear nations combined!

[Bubblehead1980]

Just a reminder, before the Persian Gulf War back in early 90's, James Baker implied to Iraqi Officials that if chem or bio weapons were used on US troops, a nuclear response was not off the table.This bluff worked.Now the current President has basically said we won't fight back to the best of our ability if attacked by something just as harsh as a nuke, such as bio or chem attack.I do not quote Sarah Palin usually because I am not a big fan but she was right when she said it was like backing down from a schoolyard bully after being attacked.

I don't mind the reduction as much I suppose but we should be reducing our stockpile when other nations building them.The goal of a world without nuclear weapons is admirable but not possible, maybe in liberal land where it rains gummy bears but not in the real world.You can not uninvent something, best thing can do is what worked during the cold war, make sure the enemy knows you have the ability and will use it if attacked.While we are in a war against terrorism and despite what mr muslim sympathies obama says, a war against radical islam, we also have nations to worry about and need to maintain our ability to deter these nations and use the nukes if needed.First he scraps a missle shield for less effective alternative now this crap.The naivete shown by Obama in foreign relations just screams Jimmy Carter.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Now the current President has basically said we won't fight back to the best of our ability if attacked by something just as harsh as a nuke, such as bio or chem attack.

Right that. just that virusses do not go Bang! does not mean they are the more harmless weapon. They are not, and they are not called for no reason the "hydrogen bomb of the poor man".

On a side note, Israel has declared to boycott the nuclear summit in Washington, fearing that it will be abused by Turkey and Syria to attack and trying to weaken Israel by putting it'S arsenal on the agenda, while ignoring Iran. Obama will not be pleased by the Israeli decision. And Israel would be damaging it'S own vital interest of caring for it. A German newspaper quotes a close adviser to Netanyahu with having said: "Obama is a total disaster for Israel". In other words: the ice age is set to most probably continue, until Obama leaves office, or another, more leftist Israeli government takes over.

Turkey's Erdoghan recently closed ties with Iran, calling it a close friend and defending it's nuclear ambitions, also saying that Iran like any Muslim country never can do anything that could be called "wrong" because as an Islamic country it cannot do any wrong. And this in a time when the Turkish Imams started legal actions to topple secularism and getting legal and political immunity from the law, end governmental overwatching of mosques and Imams, and getting equal power over turkish society like the government. Erdoghan's fundamentalist AKP is going conform with almost all these demands, much of these demands will be accepted. Which essentially mean'S the end of the current constitutional state order and the end of Ataturk'S attempt to keep Islam in check by implementing laws for a secular society.

http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/a...-sprengen.html

Turkey is no ally for us. High time, very high time that the fools in Washington finally get it. American idealistic thinking and shortsighted politcal pragmatism is no match for Islam's archaic energy. The changes in Turkey since the rise of the AKP are worrying, very worrying. They vast majority of the group of secular, West-oriented Turks are worried, too. add to this the growing ultranationalistic sentiments and the dream for restablishing a post-osmanic dominance. If a comparable thing would take place in Germany, all you guys already would have gone yelling and shouting.

START does not effect North Korea. Not Pakistan. Not Iran. All these are challenges that Obama has no answer for. So do not overestimate START. and more challenges like these countries are likely to appear in the forseeable future.

[Admiral8Q]

A reduction in nuclear weapons 33% means nothing. That's only 7 to 10 times the annihilation of our planet.

On a side note, Israel has declared to boycott the nuclear summit in Washington, fearing that it will be abused by Turkey and Syria to attack and trying to weaken Israel by putting it'S arsenal on the agenda, while ignoring Iran.

Since the problems with Iran are a major focus of the summit how can that be true?
Besides which Israel is not boycotting the summit, its just that Bibi is not attending in person.
Further detatched from reality is Skys claim about the countries involved. Israel says its Turkey and Egypt that were going to be pushing the issue of Israel signing up to the NPT.
It should also be noted that all countries which are not part of the NPT will be on the agenda anyway, so thats North Korea, Pakistan, India and errrr....Israel.

[tater]

It's possible to imagine using a nuke, but the scenarios are very limited.

This is actually a good reason to continue work on new weapons, particularly deep penetrators. A penetrating ground burst maximizes local fallout, but minimizes distant fallout. This is critical to actually be able to use the weapon without irradiating nearby (friendly countries, or hostile nuclear powers) nations.

Having such weapons lends credibility to the threat to use them, and increases deterrence.

Maybe we need to think along the lines of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress