The START Treaty Must Be Opposed

December 16, 2010 16:43

If approved, it will be a dangerous and capricious move that will undermine our security for years to come.

By Newsmax Editorial


Some Senate Republicans appear ready to cave in to the strong-arm tactics the Obama administration and Sen. Harry Reid are using in their effort to ram through a lame-duck Congress one of the most sweeping nuclear treaties the United States has ever signed, a treaty that has many problems that could jeopardize America’s national security.

Indeed, many who played central roles in Reagan’s arms-control strategy that led to the end of the Cold War are warning that it would be a major mistake to sign and ratify New START.

Among those with sterling conservative credentials urging Senate Republicans to oppose the unprecedented move to pass a major international treaty during a lame-duck session of Congress: former Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Perle, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, former national security adviser William P. Clark, former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese III, former Reagan administration Assistant Secretary of Defense and Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney, and many more.

When Republicans noted that the preamble of the treaty appears to hand the Russians the long-sought weapon they need to eviscerate the U.S. edge in development of a missile shield to guard against rogue nuclear attacks from Iran or elsewhere, the administration downplayed the significance of treaty language.

A greater concern, however, is the Russian negotiators’ insistence that President Obama did in fact negotiate a de facto prohibition on further U.S. development of its missile defenses.


Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere:

Interested In Further Reading? Click Here