• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Scare Tactics on New START

    If the Senate doesn’t ratify New START, proponents of the arms-control agreement fear, then … well, the world will come to end.

    The latest warning came from Joseph Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a foundation that advocates a nuclear weapons-free world. “A delayed ratification with a close vote would be a blow to U.S. leadership around the world,” he told the Associated Press, “People would doubt the president’s ability to negotiate other agreements.”

    More pressure to just “sign the treaty so we can purge the world of nuclear weapons” will be fueled by the premiere this week in Washington and New York of “Countdown to Zero,” a documentary on the threat of nuclear weapons. As one reviewer notes, the “film asserts that the United States and Russia, the entities with the most weapons by far, should lead the other nuclear countries toward a total disarmament initiative.”

    The sudden surge of concern over the treaty started with a blast from Mitt Romney, who declared the treaty “Obama’s worst foreign policy mistake.” Sens. John Kerry and Richard Lugar  have both been cheerleading the treaty, as the administration quickly counterattacked. They were later joined by Sen. Carl Levin. But rather allay the concerns, the exchange only raised more questions.

    The administration quickly dispatched Defense Secretary Robert Gates to calm Republican concerns. Apparently, that didn’t work. In the latest round of hearings, after U.S. officials stated they weren’t concerned that the Russians cheat on implementing arms control, Sen. John McCain declared, “Well, what this brings to the casual observer’s mind, general, is if it doesn’t have any consequences if they do any cheating, what’s the point in having a treaty?”

    In a further sign of panic, there are reports of furious backroom dealings, negotiations, and threats of retaliation from the administration to get enough Republicans to sign on to approving the treaty.

    All the pressure to blow past the critics, cut backroom deals, and get the treaty ratified ought to raise huge red flags. New START has had less than half the number of hearings that treaties are normally subjected to. And the pace for approval certainly is trying to outdo any nuclear-arms pact the U.S. Senate has ever considered. Not only is the speed with which it is being pushed through unprecedented, the administration continues to withhold key documents, including the treaty negotiating record.

    The arguments that rejecting the treaty will mean disaster bear scrutiny as well.

    First, there are real alternatives to effective arms control. Former Assistant Secretary of State Kim Holmes recently wrote that critics of “New START do not oppose all arms-control pacts. But they worry that this treaty can lead to more instability in the world, not less. They think there is a better way to achieve arms control. And they are disappointed that the Obama administration negotiated a treaty pegged to yesterday’s problems.”

    Second, there is research to suggest that this treaty might actually result in more nuclear proliferation and increase the likelihood of nuclear conflict.

    The irony is that the lemming-like support for Obama arms control may actually turn the “countdown to zero” into the “countdown to zero-hour.”

    Cross-posted at Big Peace.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to Scare Tactics on New START

    1. wahduhfug says:

      why hasn't anyone found anything illegal to force an impeachment of this president. he has done more than enough damage.

    2. Pingback: CSS Key Generator [ NEW 2010] HOT !!!! | Rid of Spyware

    3. Shane Connor, Centra says:

      It was predictable that the new "Countdown to Zero" disarmament movie

      would omit any life-saving strategies from their agenda of banning

      nukes, like advocating public Civil Defense, to try and better

      survive nukes in the meantime.

      The disarmament movement has for over 60 years espoused that if nukes

      are unleashed; all will die or it will be so bad you'll wish you had.

      They've wanted all to embrace that the only hope to ever survive nukes

      is to ban them. They've largely succeeded, as most now think it

      futile, bordering on lunacy, to ever try and learn how to prep for

      surviving a nuclear explosion.

      Ironically, these disarmament activists have made millions of us even

      more vulnerable to perishing from nukes in the future.

      For instance, most now ridicule "duck & cover", but for the majority,

      not right at 'ground zero' and already gone, the blast wave will be

      delayed in arriving after the flash, like lightening & thunder,

      anywhere from a fraction of a second up to 20 seconds, or more.

      Today, without "duck & cover" training, everyone at work, home, and

      your children at school, will impulsively rush to the nearest windows

      to see what that 'bright flash' was, just-in-time to be shredded by

      the glass imploding inward from that delayed blast wave. They'd never

      been taught that even in the open, just laying flat, reduces by

      eight-fold the chances of being hit by debris from that brief,

      3-second, tornado strength blast.

      Then, later, before the radioactive fallout can hurt them, most won't

      know to move perpendicular away from the downwind drift of the

      fallout to get out from under it before it even arrives. And, for

      those who can't evacuate in time, few know how quick & easy it is to

      throw together an expedient fallout shelter, most anywhere they are,

      to safely wait out the radioactive fallout as it loses 99% of its

      lethal intensity in the first 48 hours.

      The greatest tragedy of that high loss of life, when nukes come to

      America, will be that most who died will have needlessly perished,

      along with their families, out of ignorance of how easily they might

      have avoided becoming additional casualties, all because they were

      sold it was futile to ever try and learn how to beforehand.

      You can thank the disarmament movement, and all those who've parroted

      their un-survivability theme these many decades, for these unintended

      consequences and inconvenient truth.

      My article, "The Good News About Nuclear Destruction!" at
      http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm dispels those deadly myths of nuclear

      un-survivability that have kept all our families vulnerable and

      ignorant of how to survive nukes, and will for as long as any are

      still around.

      Shane Connor
      http://www.ki4u.com

    4. ama, hi says:

      The problem with the current Administrations is I feel they are negotiating with FEAR of the Russians not accepting the START, where the Russians are saying that if the START is not accepted by the US, then they will continue to build more weapons. So what? We never TRUST them in anything. They are the ones helping IRAN and Northe Korea with the help of China to build their Nuclear weapons. The US, should never Back Down or believe that the Russians will follow our lead to disarm. As Reagan said, Negotiate from our level of Strength. Russia, China, Iran and North Korea all have the same goal, Destroy the US and her Allies.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×