Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Is anyonepaying attention to this? I have a little bit and I guess in theory its a good i dea but I have a few problems with it.

- Its not 1970... The Russians can no longer afford to maintain their nuclear aresnal. They will benefit by having us reduce our arsenal only to match the cuts they would have to make to theirs regardless.

- Russia not the greatest threat... I'm not as concerned with Russia having nuclear capabilities as I am with N. Korea, Iran, China, Venezuela, Packistan, etc. This treaty does nothing to limit capabilities or impose transparency on the contries with which pose a much greater current and future threat to the United States.

- Defensive limitations... Some opponents to the treaty state that the preamble language of it will limit the United States' ability to develop, impliemnt and maintain a strategic misseel defense system. Not only for protection from the Russians but any nation that has nuclear and balistic missle capabilities. A scary thought these days. Especially in light of that "unexplaned, " 'con-trail' " That appeared off the coast of california several weeks ago.

All-in-all. Sounds like a pretty good deal for Russia and not so much for us.


Thoughts?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,444 Posts
And Obama gives away another part of the American peoples security.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
we already battled back and forth on this.

8 or 9 threads down.

it is called "OBAMA SECURES REPUBLICAN VOTE"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,410 Posts
You are correct. There is absolutely no need for this, and the rest of the world is still laughing at barry..
Wait...I thought he got a noble peace prize...not worth what it used to be anymore I guess.:laughing:

One other thing. That crazy mofo Kim Jung Il, the smartest guy in the world because he can still clap hands with only half a brain, is really liable to send a nuke into S.K....he's about to ie, they say, so what's he got to lose? That would light up Obama...what would Barry do in response? I bet he blinks, like he always has.

One thing that may be the wildcard in all this... Russia's Parliament still has to approve the treaty...they be say screw it, but not likely.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,444 Posts
My Bad, Didn't notice it.


Mods Feel free to merge with other thread if you see fit.
Hell no. Let these guys argue out as to what to do with this thread. It may be the only thing they can agree on...:rolling::rolling::rolling:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,410 Posts
Hell no. Let these guys argue out as to what to do with this thread. It may be the only thing they can agree on...:rolling::rolling::rolling:
I'm loving the avatar, Ivan. :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
You are correct. There is absolutely no need for this, and the rest of the world is still laughing at barry..

NOT EVERYBODY IS LAUGHING:down:


NO WAIT

THE DEMS ARE LAUGHING

THE REPUBS ARE STILL LOOKING KINDA STRANGE AT THE MOMENT
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
NOT EVERYBODY IS LAUGHING:down:
This is one of those awkward moments for you, kind of like you sleepwalked to the mall in your underwear, and everyone knows except you. :lookinup:

That's how far out of touch the entire left has become.. don't feel bad, just get into a store and buy some clothes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,111 Posts
Benjamin Franklin said "There never was a good war, or a bad peace". While that is certainly true, the langage of diplomacy is embodied in what we call treaties, and unless you speak that language (and few do) it can look like you gave away the candy store. Having read through this document, I have some serious concerns with whether or not it is in our national best interest. As RJ correctly pointed out, I feel that it targets the wrong potential adversaries. While it may sound selfish, a healthy dose of "What's in this for me?" must always be a part of any treaty negotiations on the part of the United States. It used to be, and it must be even more so in the future. Since I opened with one of our greatest statesmen, I'll close with him too: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top