Abject Surrender In Dead Of Night

[Ms Tree]

You may be right. The treaty may be scraped if Russia intends on reinterpreting the treaty. I suspect Russia wants the treaty more than we do and will huff and puff but in the end will accept it as is. They will try and talk about SDI at a later date.

 

[dapoes]

You may be right. The treaty may be scraped if Russia intends on reinterpreting the treaty. I suspect Russia wants the treaty more than we do and will huff and puff but in the end will accept it as is. They will try and talk about SDI at a later date.

Russia has nothing to lose by walking away. They were in the superior position all along and they knew it. They win if only they get their way by getting the USA to agree on directly linking strategic offensive and defensive weapons which will never happen.

If anyone bends, it will be Obama, but he lost that opportunity as of Jan 5th.

 

[777 fixer]

[
President Obama may not be troubled by additional barriers to building a comprehensive missile defense. After all, he has already cut the missile interceptor force for protecting the U.S. by 50%. However, future presidents who are serious about missile defense would be hamstrung by this treaty, which would be in effect for 10 years.

Obama played his trump card already. Disarm unilaterally, starting with destroying 50% of our arsenal. First he was no on ABM, now he is yes. After he threw the Ukraine and Poland under the bus, now he wants to extend a hand?

How does reducing missile interceptors make the USA less secure? And how do we pay for it?

 

[dapoes]

How does reducing missile interceptors make the USA less secure? And how do we pay for it?

You probably should educate yourself first on what the missile interceptors purpose is. It will answer your question for you.

How do we pay for it? All those bajillion dollars of savings promised from Obamacare, etc, etc, etc.....

 

[777 fixer]

You probably should educate yourself first on what the missile interceptors purpose is. It will answer your question for you.

How do we pay for it? All those bajillion dollars of savings promised from Obamacare, etc, etc, etc.....

You couldn’t come up with anything so you resorted to insults, nice.

We seem to have our answer regarding how the GOP led Congress is going to handle the defense budget. The Sec of Defense just announced $75 billion in cuts over the next five years along with $100 billion in savings from "efficiencies".

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon said "I remain committed to applying more fiscal responsibility and accountability to the Department of Defense, but I will not stand idly by and watch the White House gut defense when Americans are deployed in harm's way." How $15 billion a year is gutting the defense budget considering it's overall size I have no idea.

 

[delldude]

You couldn’t come up with anything so you resorted to insults, nice.

We seem to have our answer regarding how the GOP led Congress is going to handle the defense budget. The Sec of Defense just announced $75 billion in cuts over the next five years along with $100 billion in savings from "efficiencies".

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon said "I remain committed to applying more fiscal responsibility and accountability to the Department of Defense, but I will not stand idly by and watch the White House gut defense when Americans are deployed in harm's way." How $15 billion a year is gutting the defense budget considering it's overall size I have no idea.

Who plopped it on the GOP desk Jan 7th? LOL

No politics involved now is there?

 

[777 fixer]

Who plopped it on the GOP desk Jan 7th? LOL

No politics involved now is there?

Since the defense budget is a large part of overall budget it goes without saying if you are going put a dent in the deficit you have to take a long hard look at the DOD. If the GOP is going to turn around and say "Everything but the defense budget" then it would seem they are really not that serious about the deficit.

 

[Ms Tree]

No one in DC is concerned about the budget. They all have their pet projects for their state or district. The deficit has increased in nearly every administration and every Congress. The people all want to have everything but no one seems to be willing to pay for it. And the cycle continues.

 

[dapoes]

Well that didn't take long....

Russia Warns US on Missile Plan, Balks ON START

MOSCOW — Russia sees the planned U.S. missile defense system as a potential threat to its nuclear forces and may review its participation in a landmark nuclear arms treaty, officials said Monday

 

[dapoes]

So much for Russia honoring the START treaty

Russia has deployed short-range nuclear warheads in its Kaliningrad territory which borders NATO members Poland and Lithuania, Lithuanian Defence Minister Rasa Jukneviciene claimed Tuesday.

 

[777 fixer]

Congress appripriates money do they not? We have seen over the years the DOD try to either cut or even kill a program only to have the House bring it back to life. There are numerous examples of this.

Take the V-22. Back when Dick Cheney was Sec Of Defense he tried to kill the program. However Congress steped in and funded the program anyway. Another example is the C-17. The Bush Administration tried to end production only to have Congress apprporiate money anyway.

Congress just voted to finally kill the alternative engine for the JSF, the F136 built by GE in Ohio. Ironically deficit hawk John Boehner wanted the program to continue even though. It was not wanted by the DOD.

 

[Ms Tree]

Ironic no, typical of hypocritical lying dirt bag politicians ... yes.