GOP refuses to vote on Nuclear Treaty with Russia

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Nov 17, 2010.

  1. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    Regardless of your politics, this is dangerous.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/17/democrats-pushing-for-nuclear-treaty-vote-_n_784701.html
     
  2. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #2
    Well, I don't know how dangerous the lack of the treaty actually is going to be, but it is telling about the current state of Republican foreign policy.

    First, the Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush I establishment have essentially been expelled by the Republican Party.

    Second, denying the President any sort of deference in foreign policy has ceased to exist.

    Third, they are all disingenuous or living in a parallel universe except for Lugar, Corker, and Isakson.

    Anyways, there are going to be widespread repercussions for this treaty going down in the transatlantic relationship, Russian-US relations, Russian-European relations, domestic Russian politics, domestic American politics, and American credibility writ large.
     
  3. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #3
    I guess if you're going to sign a treaty, better to get it right than to rush it right?
     
  4. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #4
    First, this has not been rushed. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has done the most thorough review on this treaty than any other arms reduction treaty to date. This should have come up for a vote months ago.

    Second, serious people realize that arguments revolving around missile defense, modernization programs, and verification are just cover for nihilist opposition.

    The treaty does limit certain aspects of missile defense, but contrary to Republican talking points, the Obama administration is moving forward with missile defense located in Europe. It is going to be a major theme at the forthcoming NATO summit in Lisbon. The current US ambassador to NATO just two days ago had an oped in the New York Times making the case why missile defense is necessary.

    Kyl has already extracted an additional $4 billion out of the administration on top of an existing $10 billion for nuclear modernization. As best I can tell, the administration has been acting in good faith and it is Kyl who is trying to extract more pork due to the changing vote count in the next Senate. The fact that Kyl wants budgeting norms altered to accommodate this is telling. The problem is the treaty goes down, there may be no additional funds for modernization.

    Finally, it is important to know that currently there is no verification with Russia because there is no treaty in place. Even though verification could be stronger in the treaty, what verification is in the treaty is significantly better than the status quo.

    There are no legitimate reasons for this treaty to go down.
     
  5. leekohler, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010

    leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Sure there are. The Republicans stated from day one that they would block anything Obama tries to do. They certainly have lived up to that statement.

    I'll say this again, Republicans are not interested in serving the people or doing what is right for the country. Their only interest is power.
     
  6. paddy macrumors 6502a

    paddy

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Location:
    TN
    #6
    GOP are increasingly demonstrating that they are a filth ridden party. Not that that was beyond any doubt after the last 10 years anyway.
     
  7. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #7
    That party must be made up of the worst kinds of people put together, it seems everything they do is petty, backstabbing and selfish. I know it's an oxymoron, but why can't we have at least halfway decent, halfway honest politicians who actually gave half a crap about the people in this country? :(
     
  8. 184550 Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #8
    Sorry, which party was it that had Rangel and Waters this year?

    Now, the GOP is certainly no better but let's think next time, eh Pot?
     
  9. paddy macrumors 6502a

    paddy

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Location:
    TN
    #9
    Where did I say the Dems were better/worse?

    Why do I have to add in brackets (but the Dems did x too) after every bad deed of the GOP? I'm not going to make excuses for either, but I'm not going to try and neutralise my criticism of one party with a criticism of the other for the sake of "balance".

    Sometimes one party can be worse than the other, nothing wrong with calling it out. Does it mean I shouldn't criticise the other at times? Of course not. But the GOP has been an utter disgrace over the past 10 years. Deny that all you want, but your head is just in the sand if you don't think otherwise.
     
  10. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #10
    And the GOP is quickly demonstrating that they are incapable of working with everyone in government to get things done. That makes them worse.
     
  11. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #11
    Rupert Murdoch and his right-wing talking heads are all in bed with the people who sell gold. They want failure and conflict because it drives up the prices. (Do I have a cite? Nope, it's nothing more than a wild accusation that they haven't denied yet.)

    (edit) I love a good gold joke. The only thing funnier is a fake gold tooth.
    [in stitches]
     
  12. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #12
    Awwww. Did the poor little GOP bunnies not get to install their missiles into Poland?

    Nice strategy When are we going to kick the USA out of NATO?
     
  13. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #13
    Please do. Maybe we'll stop subsidizing defense for the rest of the western world.
     
  14. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #14
    US 'offense' hasn't made the world saver the last 10 years .. actually quite the opposite with rebrewing the arms race with russia over this whole nonsene missile shield which is just subsidizing their _own_ arms industry and fueling terrorist support all over the world


    in reality i wouldn't be surprised if the next time the US is going on "an adventure" the NATO will fall apart completley with the iraq war already streching EU-USA relations dangerously

    especially if the EU integrates more in terms of defensive structure
     
  15. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #15
    You are correct. So please kick us out. You'll be doing us all a favor.
     
  16. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #16
    Well, I don't really think Russian nuclear capability is anywhere near what they or we (governments) say it is.

    That said, a missile shield is just a plain stupid idea. There are maybe 20 countries that have the capability to actually chuck a nuke anywhere near us (delivery systems). None would seriously get into a fight with us though because even if we didn't use nukes, our conventional warfare is strong enough to annihilate anyone that attacks us.

    Long story short, a lot of what we see in regards to threats to the USA from the media, our leaders, and foreign leaders is just a big charade.
     
  17. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #17
    I agree, kick us out of NATO so that this country can do it's own thing and not have to worry about the opinions of other countries.
     
  18. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #18
    Oh, really?? Who asked you? :confused:

    Several countries have nukes, and can well protect themselves.

    Unless you equate "subsidising defence" for "gun-boat diplomacy"??

    Ha, and Ha again. As if your country ever gave a ***** about anything but their own interests.

    WW II comes to mind as a perfect example.
     
  19. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    For a democracy in today's world that isn't really an option.
     
  20. halfprep455 macrumors regular

    halfprep455

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland USA
    #20
    I doubt that the US will be kicked out of NATO or that any of the EU countries will withdraw from NATO anytime in the near future. However, NATO is slowly becoming more irrelevant everyday. I think that eventually the EU would rather integrate each members military and have their own military force then to have to rely on the US or NATO.
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #21
    NATO without the USA would be a complete joke. Practically no heavy lift capacity, a shortage of helicopters, and the UK is proposing to be without even a decent aircraft carrier for ten years, which leaves only the French with that capability. The same lack of capability would afflict a European combined force too, of course.
     
  22. halfprep455 macrumors regular

    halfprep455

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland USA
    #22
    I agree. I never said that NATO without the US would be worth anything. I honestly don't think that any combined EU force is even remotely capable of defending itself outside of its own boarders. I am just saying that given the current attitude and political climate in Europe, they might want to lessen the role of the US in NATO.
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    So what is the "threat" to the EU these days?
     
  24. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #24
    Terrrists Freedom fighters and stuff.
     
  25. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks

Share This Page