• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • New Daisy vs 33 Minutes on New START

    The American Values Network has released a new online ad aimed at pressuring the Senate to pass the New START nuclear arms agreement with Russia in the upcoming lame duck session of Congress. The ad is a carbon copy of President Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 “Daisy” ad, which equated a vote for Barry Goldwater with a vote for nuclear Armageddon. The new Daisy ad is no more based in reality. It claims, “Now no one watches nuclear weapons” and urges ratification of New START since “the stakes are too high for anything else.”

    The truth is that the U.S. has never relied on treaty-based verification measures alone for insight into Russian strategic forces. Instead, it employs a variety of reconnaissance for gaining insight into Russian strategic forces. Furthermore, the verification regime in New START provides little value. New START has fewer on-site inspections, and Russia may declare certain locations to be maintenance areas, which are not subject to warhead inspection. And so long as the Russians continue to deny inspectors the ability to confirm the true number of warheads on a missile, such inspections are of little value.

    But the treaty’s most serious impact is the limitations it imposes on the U.S. ballistic missile defense systems. The Obama Administration has sworn up and down that New START does not “contain any constraints on testing, development or deployment of current or planned U.S. missile defense programs.” This is just plain false, as subsequent White House backtracking has established.

    The fact is that both the treaty’s preamble and Russia’s unilateral statement at the signing of the treaty explicitly link missile defense and offensive nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Article V specifically limits our ability to convert ICBM and submarine-launched ballistic missile launchers into defensive interceptors . Given the trends in the proliferation of nuclear weapons and rapid improvements in the means to deliver them (think Iran and North Korea), the U.S. government must maintain its right to defend the people, territory, institutions, and infrastructure of both the U.S. and its allies.

    Watch the embedded 33 Minutes New Start trailer for a take on New START’s ramifications beyond Russia.

    [JK1]This link doesn’t work.


    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to New Daisy vs 33 Minutes on New START

    1. Max says:

      Read the treaties. The treaty's verification regime is actually stronger than before as the U.S. can actually count the number of warheads on a missile instead of the attributed counting rule.

      Of course the number of inspections is lower than START I, there are less facilities to inspect and both sides combined different types of inspections into Type I and Type II.

      Again, read the treaties.

    2. Buck Crosby Hubert , says:

      We need to get back to MAD . I would prefer nuclear annialation to what Obama envisions for this country , and why should we go alone . If that sounds radical , thats because it is , sometimes reality is unpleasant .

    3. Rob, DC says:

      This analysis would be news to STRATCOMM Commander General Chilton, who testified in Senate Armed Services this past June, "If we don't get the treaty, [the Russians] are not constrained in their development of force structure and…we have no insight into what they’re doing. So its the worst of both possible worlds."

      And Admiral Mullen pointed out in his testimony to SASC that New START has about twice as many inspections per facility as START I. So please read the hearing transcripts as well.

      Folks should do their homework before making up their mind on New START.

    4. PeterTF says:

      Heritage is all wet on this. There is no good reason to ignore the advice of the overwhelming majority of Pentagon leadership on New START. Opposing START puts ideology ahead of national security and that's no way to be serious about US defense.

    5. Bobbie says:

      His connection with the world is setting America up for destruction. He defied America from the start and continues to everywhere his world trips go.

    6. Steve S. California says:

      Interesting how not one of you FOR the new start treaty has addressed the fact that not only are restrictions not levied equally, but as per usual the antimissile capabilities are restricted for us, but not them. If you think that the lunacy of the ABM system (up one day, down the next) made sense, then I guess it's for you. We have proven antimissile capability we will not be able to field to defend against the EMP attack profile practiced by Iran. 1 weapon and several hundred million dead doesn't bother you? And I guess there's no history of people defying logic and common sense making stupid decisions that caused needles death on a huge scale, supposedly qualified or not? It is you who needs to not only read but understand, be open to the lessons of history, and less prone to blind faith in our beaurocrats, military or otherwise. Look where it's gotten us.

    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.