Obama’s New START treaty represents everything that is wrong with Washington.
Let me show you the standard Washington procedure. Newly elected officials, this will probably show up in your orientation handbook:
1. The Obama Administration negotiates a treaty with Russia out of either pure stupidity or a malicious contempt for America.
2. The Democrats convince 13 (the number changes, the result doesn’t) weak Republicans to support the treaty under the false banner of ‘compromise’.
3. The Senate passes the treaty (where 20% of the votes cast are by previously ousted politicians soon to take their posts indoctrinating your children).
4. America loses (the path changes, the result doesn’t).
Why is the New START treaty bad for America?
The New START treaty creates a legal framework by which the Russians can build up 2100 nuclear weapons while limiting the US to 1550. As Mitt Romney pointed out, the treaty defines one bomber as one weapon no matter how many warheads it is carrying. Russia has invested in heavy bomber technology – meaning that Russia will be able to circumvent the 1550 limit (to reach the 2100 warheads) while the US will be forced to limit itself to 1550 warheads.
The New START treaty also limits the number of launchers each country can deploy – to 700. Problem is, Russia already has fewer that 700 launchers. The US has about 850. Russia gives nothing but the United States reduces its capability to defend itself. Supporters of this treaty will point out that Russia has more warheads – that limit will hurt them more. However, the Russian arsenal will inevitably decline because it has fewer launchers – no point keeping weapons that you cannot fire.
What’s worse? – The New START treaty sets out language that can be used to limit US missile defence. Despite amendments by the GOP, Russia will use this treaty to limit US defence. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, explained Russia’s intent to use this treaty to limit missile defence:
Linkage to missile defense is clearly spelled out in the accord and is legally binding
This treaty creates a framework for disaster – either surrender on missile defence or risk a weapons race with Russia.
Russia is giving very little for a treaty that handcuffs the United States. This is either a horrendous example of the Obama administration’s flowery and naive worldview – or an unprecedented and successful attempt to weaken America’s security from within.
At least Russia is happy with President Obama – Lavrov commented that the process was:
a new gold standard for concluding agreements of this kind
Shouldn’t the Republicans compromise?
As Ayn Rand points out, it is impossible to compromise on principle. As she pointed out in the Virtue of Selfishness:
There can be no compromise between a property owner and a burglar; offering the burglar a single teaspoon of one’s silverware would not be a compromise, but a total surrender—the recognition of his right to one’s property.
As with the teaspoon and the new START treaty compromise is unacceptable – complete victory is the only option. Congress should never debate between drinking a gallon of cyanide or bleach, rather, it can use its power to defeat the Obama administration’s destructive treaties.
Even Lindsay Graham was horrified by the Republican ‘compromises’:
I call it capitulation. At the end of the day, our weak links were exposed
After receiving an enormous mandate from the American people, it is stunning that any Republican would vote for legislation that the Obama administration is trying to jam through congress. Republicans and Democrats disagree on the principles – any Republican willing to compromise should join the Democratic bench because they don’t believe in conservative principles.
What now?
A lame duck congress has done incredible damage to America. Americans threw out the old congress on November 2 for good reason. Only one truly bipartisan message came from this lame duck session – there are politicians on both sides of the aisle that need to lose their jobs.
