Why are the Republicans stopping START??

[JBeukema]

don't give me that "Crisis" shit. People are pretty sick of that. .

'Everything changed on 9/11'

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea i know,this is another "Crisis." I'm pretty sure Civilization wont be collapsing if this thing isn't rammed through immediately. The Lameduckers gotta go. Haven't they done enough damage? See ya in January.

 

[Greenbeard]

I love how all these Goose Stepping Wingnuts are cheerleading for this Treaty without even knowing what the hell they're talking about. Apparently it's a perfect Treaty because their Hopey Changey One says so. Such silly stuff. The Congress has a responsibility to actually read & comprehend the Treaty thoroughly before voting on it. I know that seems so strange considering what the Democrats have done to our Congress but it's actually what Congress should do before voting on anything.

Pelosi & Reid likely haven't even bothered to read this Treaty so i'm just not interested in their whining about a delay in its ratification. This is not something the Lameduckers should decide anyway. This can wait till January. Civilization will not collapse if it's not rammed through. So don't give me that "Crisis" shit. People are pretty sick of that. Congress needs to study this Treaty more before voting on it. And that's the way it should be.

I for one think 17 double-spaced pages with 6-inch margins is just too long. They could be hiding anything in there! And why haven't they posted the text online for anyone to read? And why on earth doesn't the Senate set up some kind of committee--maybe a "foreign relations" committee--where Senators with expertise and interest in these kinds of things can work with experts on staff to evaluate this before it goes to the body as a whole (culminating in something like a bipartisan vote in the committee endorsing ratification)? And why won't former commanders of STRATCOM and SAC weigh in, perhaps sending a letter of endorsement to relevant members of relevant committees? For that matter, why haven't we seen endorsements from "Six former secretaries of state, five former secretaries of defense and three former national security advisers ... along with seven former commanders of U.S. Strategic Command and the entire current U.S. military leadership"? This whole thing is fishy!

Clearly nihilism is the right political path here. Maybe it'll help Republicans in the next election!

 

[Vanquish]

If the Reagan thin was sarcasm, then I apologize.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I love how all these Goose Stepping Wingnuts are cheerleading for this Treaty without even knowing what the hell they're talking about. Apparently it's a perfect Treaty because their Hopey Changey One says so. Such silly stuff. The Congress has a responsibility to actually read & comprehend the Treaty thoroughly before voting on it. I know that seems so strange considering what the Democrats have done to our Congress but it's actually what Congress should do before voting on anything.

Pelosi & Reid likely haven't even bothered to read this Treaty so i'm just not interested in their whining about a delay in its ratification. This is not something the Lameduckers should decide anyway. This can wait till January. Civilization will not collapse if it's not rammed through. So don't give me that "Crisis" shit. People are pretty sick of that. Congress needs to study this Treaty more before voting on it. And that's the way it should be.

I for one think 17 double-spaced pages with 6-inch margins is just too long. They could be hiding anything in there! And why haven't they posted the text online for anyone to read? And why on earth doesn't the Senate set up some kind of committee--maybe a "foreign relations" committee--where Senators with expertise and interest in these kinds of things can work with experts on staff to evaluate this before it goes to the body as a whole (culminating in something like a bipartisan vote in the committee endorsing ratification)? And why won't former commanders of STRATCOM and SAC weigh in, perhaps sending a letter of endorsement to relevant members of relevant committees? For that matter, why haven't we seen endorsements from "Six former secretaries of state, five former secretaries of defense and three former national security advisers ... along with seven former commanders of U.S. Strategic Command and the entire current U.S. military leadership"? This whole thing is fishy!

Clearly nihilism is the right political path here. Maybe it'll help Republicans in the next election!

"Nihilism" lol! Yea that's pretty weak. Yup it's Nihilism for our Congress to actually do its job and thoroughly read & understand things before they vote on them. Oh the humanity. Personally i don't feel these Lameduckers should be passing this Treaty. They've done enough damage in my opinion. This can wait. Nothing to see here. There's no "Crisis."

 

[Greenbeard]

"Nihilism" lol! Yea that's pretty weak. Yup it's Nihilism for our Congress to actually do its job and thoroughly read & understand things before they vote on them. Oh the humanity. Personally i don't feel these Lameduckers should be passing this Treaty. They've done enough damage in my opinion. This can wait. Nothing to see here. There's no "Crisis."

The text has been available since April. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted on a bipartisan basis to endorse ratification in September. A host of subject experts have not only endorsed ratification but I'm certain are also available for a chat with any Senator who does the arduous work of reading the 17 sparsely-spaced pages of the treaty (although apparently this first step takes longer than 7 months).

You call supporters "Goose Stepping Wingnuts" and imply that this treaty will result in "damage" and yet I get the sense you're entirely unfamiliar with it and have chosen instead to rely entirely on partisan cues to figure out what you think about this issue. That's not nihilism per se, that's just silliness. It's the people you follow that are nihilists; at this point they believe in nothing, relying instead on some odd base urge to reflexively oppose anything the President might favor.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

"Nihilism" lol! Yea that's pretty weak. Yup it's Nihilism for our Congress to actually do its job and thoroughly read & understand things before they vote on them. Oh the humanity. Personally i don't feel these Lameduckers should be passing this Treaty. They've done enough damage in my opinion. This can wait. Nothing to see here. There's no "Crisis."

The text has been available since April. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted on a bipartisan basis to endorse ratification in September. A host of subject experts have not only endorsed ratification but I'm certain are also available for a chat with any Senator who does the arduous work of reading the 17 sparsely-spaced pages of the treaty (although apparently this first step takes longer than 7 months).

You call supporters "Goose Stepping Wingnuts" and imply that this treaty will result in "damage" and yet I get the sense you're entirely unfamiliar with it and have chosen instead to rely entirely on partisan cues to figure out what you think about this issue. That's not nihilism per se, that's just silliness. It's the people you follow that are nihilists; at this point they believe in nothing, relying instead on some odd base urge to reflexively oppose anything the President might favor.

It's not Nihilism to disagree with a President or his Party. And why should we trust the Democrats anyway? They're notorious for ramming Legislation through without even reading it. What's wrong with taking some more time? Let me guess,it's another "Crisis" right? Yea we've heard enough of that "Crisis" shit from these Lameduckers. This can certainly wait. Lets talk about it next year.

 

[Trajan]

You asked what would Reagan do. I replied-

sure but he would not rush into it

your reply-

The only people rushing anything are the morons rushing to attack anything Obama does while claiming that 'we can't read it' when the link's been posted.

My reply-

tell it to them. What does that have to do with me?

whats your fascination with the race angle btw?

Your reply-

The reichwingers are the ones comparing the poor to strays, saluting the ideals of the Waffen SS,hosting rallies frequented by neonzis and full of racist signs, sending racist emails, saying 'all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?... and, of course David Duke became a Republican

my reply-

what does the above have to do with this thread?

your reply-

It proves that you're retarded, since you can't tell it's in response the post immediately preceding it- which you posted

The topic is-
Why are the Republicans stopping START??

You went off on a tangent here, it appears that you feel this is a race issue??

I asked you once, what is the race angle?

It appears, appears being the operative word here, that you feel republican angst or any opposition to fast tracking the treaty is based on a race issue? Can you explain please?

 

[JBeukema]

Have you been living under a rock since the election?

The Republican base has been coming out of the woodwork. They can't stand the thought of a black man in the white [man's] house being anything but a total failure

Just look at the neonazis meeting up at the teabagger rallies, the racist signs everywhere, or the emails they send out

that's why they oppose their own legislation as soon as the ****** in the white [man's] house says he likes it

 

[Trajan]

Have you been living under a rock since the election?

The Republican base has been coming out of the woodwork. They can't stand the thought of a black man in the white [man's] house being anything but a total failure

Just look at the neonazis meeting up at the teabagger rallies, the racist signs everywhere, or the emails they send out

that's why they oppose their own legislation as soon as the ****** in the white [man's] house says he likes it

so me/we/they are all racist. Any opposition is based on race.

So it follows, if I don't see it that way, I am a racist too? hummmm.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

And why are the Hopey Changeys whining so much over the possibility the Republicans are trying to stop this President and the Democrats? I'm actually all for that and i think Millions of Americans agree with me. All the Democrats did the previous eight years was try to stop the Republicans and the President. Remember all that "No Rubber Stamp" stuff? All they did was constantly undermine and screech about how the Sky was Falling. So why are the feigning such outrage over the Republicans trying to stop this President and Democrats? Seems pretty dishonest and hypocritical to me. The Republicans should try and stop this President and Democrats. I expect nothing less of them.

 

[The T]

Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week

Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?

Because it favors the russians and does not adeqately address the threats from Iran and North Korea.

Patently false. This was the same system that has worked for decades. It's all political.

For years, Moscow has argued that the proposed U.S. missile defense system is aimed at Russia, a view rejected by American officials.

John Bolton is a former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and an arms control expert:

"We have explained to them ever since 2001, when the [George W.] Bush administration withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, that the only plans the United States had were to have a national missile defense capability against limited nuclear strikes, against the strikes that rogue states like North Korea or Iran or back then Iraq, might have been capable of," said Bolton.

US, Russia Still at Odds on Missile Defense

 

[Capitalist]

Have you been living under a rock since the election?

The Republican base has been coming out of the woodwork. They can't stand the thought of a black man in the white [man's] house being anything but a total failure

Just look at the neonazis meeting up at the teabagger rallies, the racist signs everywhere, or the emails they send out

that's why they oppose their own legislation as soon as the ****** in the white [man's] house says he likes it

Paranoid and playing the race card is no way to go through life, son.
BTW
Stop bashing gays. Your use of the word "Teabagger" is troubling and hateful.

 

[Greenbeard]

It's not Nihilism to disagree with a President or his Party.

The Republicans should try and stop this President and Democrats. I expect nothing less of them.

"Disagreement" implies a certain level of philosophical grounding and content familiarity that you don't seem to have. Rather this process seems to be more like a football game to you.

And I think that's why some are (falsely, I think) seeing racism as being such a prime motivator: this concept of disagreement ultimately being based on nothing is still somewhat alien. Opposing a 17-page treaty because 7 or 8 months isn't enough time to review it (despite the fact that it has been reviewed and endorsed by experts and the relevant Senate committee, whose membership already includes almost 20% of the Senate) might strike a casual observer as being a bizarre argument. Same with arguing against a health care bill based on page count and little factual discussion of the actual content of those pages. It's all become process and cosmetics instead of substance.

And I can see how someone would find that very hard to believe and try to identify some ulterior motive (e.g. racism). But I'm starting to believe there really is just an increasing undercurrent of nihilism here. I don't know what else could account of the sheer level of absurdity we're seeing.

 

[rdean]

Why are the Republicans stopping START??

It's half of their policies.

First policy: Cut taxes because we need more gravel roads.

Second Policy: Stop Obama from fixing their mess. Stopping "Start" is part of "Stop Obama".

That's it. That's all the Republican policies for the last two years and for the next two.

Moving jobs to China is something they do in their spare time to raise cash for campaigning.

 

[Capitalist]

Why are the Republicans stopping START??

It's half of their policies.

First policy: Cut taxes because we need more gravel roads.

Second Policy: Stop Obama from fixing their mess. Stopping "Start" is part of "Stop Obama".

That's it. That's all the Republican policies for the last two years and for the next two.

Moving jobs to China is something they do in their spare time to raise cash for campaigning.

I trust Obama is the smartest POTUS ever, but could we verify his school records just to make sure. I mean we are "all" for "verification", aren't we.

 

[Full-Auto]

Have you been living under a rock since the election?

The Republican base has been coming out of the woodwork. They can't stand the thought of a black man in the white [man's] house being anything but a total failure

Just look at the neonazis meeting up at the teabagger rallies, the racist signs everywhere, or the emails they send out

that's why they oppose their own legislation as soon as the ****** in the white [man's] house says he likes it

Youre a certified fruit loop.

 

[Trajan]

It's not Nihilism to disagree with a President or his Party.

The Republicans should try and stop this President and Democrats. I expect nothing less of them.

"Disagreement" implies a certain level of philosophical grounding and content familiarity that you don't seem to have. Rather this process seems to be more like a football game to you.

And I think that's why some are (falsely, I think) seeing racism as being such a prime motivator: this concept of disagreement ultimately being based on nothing is still somewhat alien. Opposing a 17-page treaty because 7 or 8 months isn't enough time to review it (despite the fact that it has been reviewed and endorsed by experts and the relevant Senate committee, whose membership already includes almost 20% of the Senate) might strike a casual observer as being a bizarre argument. Same with arguing against a health care bill based on page count and little factual discussion of the actual content of those pages. It's all become process and cosmetics instead of substance.

And I can see how someone would find that very hard to believe and try to identify some ulterior motive (e.g. racism). But I'm starting to believe there really is just an increasing undercurrent of nihilism here. I don't know what else could account of the sheer level of absurdity we're seeing.

the protocols has the guts of the inspections processes, section V11 part 5. I spent a hour hour reading it, I didn't see any factory inspections/surveillance, for either.

In the past we have had factory inspections/surveillance ( as I posted earlier in this thread), in our Thiokol Strategic Operations factory and a Lockheed/Grumman plants in Penn. and Ca. in Russia at say the Votkinsk rocket factory (which will be producing Russias new land based platform the RS-24, which will be their premier system into 2030).

now it appears we have forgone this inspection/surveillance process, my question for one, is why? And no I don't trust Putin to produce the number they say they are, we on the other had would find it infinitely harder to do so due to the oversight here as compared to his wishes over there.

 

[Care4all]

Who cares what Obama wants?

IF it is in the BEST INTEREST of our Nation, why NOT take care of it now?

In this instance, I believe this is just political posturing by the Repubs...

 

[Trajan]

Who cares what Obama wants?

IF it is in the BEST INTEREST of our Nation, why NOT take care of it now?

In this instance, I believe this is just political posturing by the Repubs...

to an extent that is true, as always. Are you sure its in our best interests?