Senate votes 71-26 to approve nuclear arms treaty with Russia

[NYC Liberal]

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN) -- The Senate voted Wednesday to approve the new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia -- a major foreign policy victory for the Obama administration near the end of the lame-duck session of Congress.

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START, was cleared with the help of solid Democratic support, as well as the backing of several Republican senators.

If ratified, the treaty would resume inspections of each country's nuclear arsenal while limiting both the United States and Russia to 1,550 warheads and 700 launchers. It still needs to be approved by the Russian parliament.

President Obama signed the treaty with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April. The accord is considered a critical component of nuclear non-proliferation efforts and the administration's attempt to "reset" Washington's relationship with Moscow.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/22/start/index.html?hpt=Sbin

[Tx4obama]

1. Our President Obama is going to have a great Christmas this year :)

[Still a Democrat]

2. Pic is ridiculously over the top

I love it.

[Tx4obama]

3. With the passage of DADT repeal, 9/11 HC bill, START Treaty, ....

DoD Authorization bill, The Food Safety bill, etc etc etc

I thought the pic was appropriate :)

[h9socialist]

4. It'll have Rush Limbaugh trying to a source of Kryptonite.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Good, kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, NYC Liberal.:thumbsup:

[bowens43]

6. Excellent!! .... nt

[wisteria]

7. Excellent news! n/t

[DainBramaged]

8. 71-26, what a kick in the nuts to the obstructionists

:headbang:


Republicans voting for the treaty on Wednesday were Senators Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Robert F. Bennett of Utah, Scott P. Brown of Massachusetts, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Johnny Isakson of Georgia, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and George V. Voinovich of Ohio.

[BenzoDia]

9. This wouldn't be a 'Democrat' win if Republicans didn't make such a big damned deal

of trying to block it.

[Kber]

10. Good point.

[Turbineguy]

11. The Russians

probably threatened to out a few rogue KGB agents in the Senate.

[bossy22]

12. as much as it hates me to say this

but DeMint's statement about parirty is actually correct. There is no foreseeble reason why we must still maintain parirty with the russians in terms of weapons. They are a military shell of their former selves who in almost no way other than nuclear weapons is a strategic equal to us.

My fear is that by lowering the total amount of warheads to an even lower level may encourage a nuclear arms race. Medium regional powers may think they now have the ability to match the U.S. and Russia in terms of nuclear weapons. Such a situation happened with regards to the washington naval treaty- it allowed japan to build a navy equal to the U.S. and GB's

[Lionel Mandrake]

20. None of the arguments against this treaty make sense.

Compared to conventional forces, nuclear weapons are a relatively cheap way for a weaker nation (e.g., Russia) to maintain a credible threat to a stronger nation (e.g., the USA). Under this circumstance, parity is a reasonable formula, and arguably the best formula, for a bilateral treaty.

All experts agree that 1550 warheads apiece are more than enough. Missile defense against either the USA or Russia would be hopeless. Even if 90% of the warheads were shot down (and they wouldn't be), the other 10% (or 155 warheads) would destroy the major cities and kill most of the people of any nation they were directed against.

This treaty will not encourage any third power to ramp up its nuclear arsenal. Further reductions might have that effect, or they might have the opposite effect -- causing other nations to reduce or eliminate their stockpiles of nuclear weapons.

If the Russian parliament ratifies this treaty, both Russia and the USA will be better off.

[liberal N proud]

13. This is why Obama had to make the compromise on the taxes.

The GOP could just run out the clock otherwise.

Although Obama lost a few points, he won this game.

[Jester Messiah]

14. I see a lot of "woo-hoo we won!", but very little of why this particular victory matters.

I'm as happy as anyone to see the repugs humbled, but I'm getting a bad feeling of "bread and circuses." Nobody is talking about the economy, nobody is (seriously) talking about the shenanigans that Wall Street and the banks are perpetrating on people... we're being distracted. Before we get too swept up in the rah-rah, let's take a minute to focus on why we chose the side we're rooting for.

[Deep13]

16. This treaty brings us closer to a world without nuclear weapons.

It also allows us to keep pressing for nuclear non-proliferation from the moral high ground.

[Jester Messiah]

19. Nuclear proliferation is an issue that has been with us since the end of WW2.

I don't see it going away any time soon, treaty or no treaty. We have more immediate concerns. People are losing their jobs, losing their homes, and going hungry. Meanwhile, the richest 2% just got an extension on a huge handout. This is NOT the time to focus on nukes.

[sirthomas66]

24. That is exactly right. But many are in transfixed mood again. It is

one of the most incredible things I have ever seen.

[Posteritatis]

26. Any reduction of nuclear weapon numbers that doesn't involve detonating them is intrinsically good.

Some things are more important than American domestic politics.

[Jester Messiah]

27. Good yes, but not urgent.

Also, it's not as if Russia is in any hurry to launch nukes at us. We're at peace, we're not seriously butting heads politically, and war would be economically ruinous (at a time when things are pretty shaky to begin with.) There is literally nothing to be gained by launching nukes. The Cold War has been over for a good while now, and even were that not the case, MAD still holds true.

So I ask you: what does this treaty accomplish, practically speaking?

[Deep13]

15. I'll sleep a little easier tonight. nt

[NuclearDem]

17. Another step closer to a world without these awful things

And yes, yes, I'm aware of the irony of me saying that.

[groundloop]

18. My repuke Senator Isakson made himself slightly less worthless by voting yes

I may have to actually send him an email thanking him for his vote.

I have a feeling that President Obama felt like it was a worthy tradeoff to let millionaires have two more years of tax breaks in order to facilitate this treaty, DADT repeal, 9/11 first responder's care, etc. etc. While I still don't like the idea of tax cuts for millionaires, I'm beginning to see things in a more favorable light, getting this treaty ratified was big.

[tootrueleft]

21. More much needed good news for the Whitehouse

:applause:

[Honeycombe8]

22. Yay! nt

[The Second Stone]

23. Make 'em vote and put them on record

see what happens when you fight? Sometimes you win. In politics you don't get to win all the time, but you do get to fight for what is right if you are willing to put things to votes frequently.

[TomCADem]

25. Amazing That Republicans Would Trash The Treaty For Political Points...

...You would think that even they would not mess with national security, but I guess we should not be surprised.