Russia and the United States have tentatively agreed to a weapons inspection program that would allow Russians to visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads.
The plan, which Fox News has learned was agreed to in principle during negotiations, would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said publicly Tuesday that the two nations have made "considerable" progress toward reaching agreement on a new strategic arms treaty.
The 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires in December and negotiators have been racing to reach agreement on a successor.
Clinton said the U.S. would be as transparent as possible.
"We want to ensure that every question that the Russian military or Russian government asks is answered," she said, calling missile defense "another area for deep cooperation between our countries."
On another critical issue, Lavrov declared that it would be counterproductive to threaten Iran with more sanctions over its nuclear program -- as he resisted efforts by Clinton to win agreement for tougher measures should Iran fail to prove its program is peaceful.
Clinton visited Moscow on her first trip since becoming America's top diplomat, in an effort to gauge Moscow's willingness to join the U.S. in imposing sanctions.
While he looks the other way on Iran and leaves Eastern Europe defenseless, Obama hands America's national security over to the likes of Vladimir Putin.
All of this happens concurrently with Russia's announcement that it believes in the preemptive use of nuclear weapons.
When I and others predicted that Obama would endanger America's national security, our warnings were dismissed as overstatement. If anything, I underestimated the extent to which Obama would endanger me, my family, and my fellow Americans. The speed with which he and his administration are destroying our national security is shocking.
It may all come down to a bad case of adolescent angst.
And when one considers the recent embarrassment of a 40-something pal of Obama videotaping hmself skateboarding down the halls of the White House, the term "adolescent" seems particularly fitting.
When it comes to Iran, Obama is still determined to try hot dog diplomacy. Inviting Iranian diplomats to share in U.S. 4th of July celebrations was bizarre when first announced, but in light of the recent regime brutality against protestors in Iran, it is downright ghoulish.
Today's massacre may finally be awakening someone in the Obama administration to the absurity and moral depravity of partying with Iranian leaders while people are being axed and shot in the streets. The latest updates are truly heart-wrenching. Here are the lastest Twitter updates at Persiankiwi (see preceding "massacre" link") in reverse chronological order:
Reportedly, the Obama administration is "seriously considering" not inviting those Iranian officials to the 4th of July celebrations after all. Ya think? Just on aesthetic grounds alone, it's hard to picture enjoying a hot dog while considering how the Iranians are currently butchering their own people. That sort of thing will put a damper on the whole party. Update: The hot dog party is off. The blood of protestors flowing freely in the streets of Iran apparently got to someone. Obama's adolescent angst on missile defense is even more dangerous. His desire not to "weaponize" space has the potential to get a lot of innocent people killed. Thankfully, as one commentator has put it, Obama is under at least some "grown up supervision" and the Defense Secretary is moving missile defense assets (developed by Reagan and continued by the Bush administration) into place to attempt to protect Hawaii, a reported target for -- what else? -- 4th of July weekend. But these sorts of last-minute, minimalist changes of position in response to clear outrages and mortal threats are not enough. In this age of growing nuclear proliferation involving several rogue and tyrannical regimes, there is no such thing as mutually assured destruction. Thugs can and will launch attacks without warning and will not be deterred by the possibility of retaliation. Nuclear missile defense is critical to America's survival. Funding for the program should be increased substantially, not slashed by billions as Obama has done. For the sake of the U.S. and the world, Obama and his advisors need to grow up in a hurry.
It has dawned on Obama's defense secretary, Robert Gates, that this is exactly the wrong time to slash $1.4 billion from U.S. missile defense. He's begun making noises about the possibility of expanding missile defense funding again "if North Korea or other nations increase threats against the United States."
While is commendable that Gates is at least suggesting the possibility of reversing Obama's dangerous policy of leaving the U.S. wide open to nuclear attack, it is ludicrous for Gates to condition the restoration of funding on "increased threats" from North Korea or others.
Nations planning truly devastating attacks rarely announce their intentions in advance, other than by the type of generalized sabre-rattling that is coming almost daily from Iran and North Korea already.
Before 9/11, would it have been sensible to condition improvements to U.S. airline security on whether al Qaeda increased its "threats" against the U.S.? Of course not. Al Qaeda was already making generalized threats before 9/11, and by the time the 9/11 attacks happened, it was already too late.
The Obama administration is flirting with disaster in standing by its $1.4 billion in missile defense agency cuts. This is no time for political games nor for dithering. The U.S. needs to be working all-out on missile defense. Instead of pouring billiions into ACORN, we should be fully funding missile defense. The stakes could not be higher.
Will Obama stand by his dangerous plan to slash the budget for the U.S. military and specifically his $1.4 billion cut to missile defense, leaving U.S. cities defenseless against nuclear missile attack?
Reaction to North Korea's successful nuclear test continues.
Time asks: What Good is Diplomacy?
It's nice that Time is finally waking up to the futility of endless negotiations with North Korea -- now that its preferred president, Barack Obama, is in office. However, the response to North Korea can't end with a realization that diplomacy has proven useless. Pointing to "global criticism" and trying to downplay the threat is useless too, because global criticism has no effect whatsoever and the problem is growing by the day.
A shoulder shrug is not a foreign policy and it certainly will not keep any nation safe. The U.S., for one, should be doubling down on its investment in nuclear missile defense now that a nuclear North Korea is an established fact. Sadly, Obama is headed in the exact opposite direction. His approach is to disarm and hope that nobody ever launches a nuclear attack. How realistic is that?
From the April 5, 2009 New York Times:
PRAGUE — Hours after North Korea’s missile test, President Obama on Sunday called for new United Nations sanctions and laid out a new approach to American nuclear disarmament policy — one intended to strengthen the United States and its allies in halting proliferation. “In a strange turn of history, the threat of global nuclear war has gone down, but the risk of a nuclear attack has gone up,” Mr. Obama told a huge crowd in the square outside of Prague Castle. “Black market trade in nuclear secrets and nuclear materials abound. The technology to build a bomb has spread.” And yet, he said, too few resources have been committed to developing a strategy to stop terrorist groups like Al Qaeda that are “determined to buy, build or steal” a bomb. Mr. Obama said that his administration would “reduce the role of nuclear weapons” in its national security strategy, and would urge other countries to do the same. He pointed to the agreement he reached last week with President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia to begin negotiations on reducing warheads and stockpiles, and said the two countries would try to reach an agreement by the end of the year. He also promised to aggressively pursue American ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which in the past has faced strong opposition in Congress. It is a strategy based on the idea that if the United States shows it is willing to greatly shrink the size of its atomic arsenal, ban nuclear testing and cut off the worldwide production of bomb material, reluctant allies and partners around the world will be more likely to rewrite nuclear treaties and enforce sanctions against North Korea and Iran. In his speech, he said North Korea’s missile test illustrated “the need for action, not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons.” “Rules must be binding,” he said. “Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.” Those words were added to the end of a long-planned arms control speech hours before, after the president was awakened at 4:30 a.m. by his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, with news of North Korea’s defiance. Instead of responding to the rapidly growing nuclear threat from North Korea and Iran with increased effort to keeping America safe, Obama has cut $1.4 billion from the U.S. missile defense agency. This is unconscionable. As dangers grow, Obama has no viable plan. All he knows is that peace is good, flowers are pretty, and if we lay down our arms, nobody will try to kill us. Here is what he said as a candidate:
The text from the video:
...I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.
Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.
I will not weaponize space.
I will slow our development of future combat systems.
And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.
Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.
He said it then, and by golly he's sticking by it now -- even as dangers mount.
Am I implying that Obama might get lots of people killed if he continues down this path?
I'm not implying it -- I'm saying it. This is no time for flowers and teleprompters.
North Korea's nuclear test caught the U.S. completely by surprise. North Korea gave the U.S. one hour's notice, presumably so the U.S. could see for itself that the detonation was not a random earthquake.
North Korea is deadly serious. The fact that smaller nations have not previously been able to unleash lethal force against nations like the U.S. means nothing in the nuclear age.
We need a president and a Congress who are clear-eyed enough to fund missile defense aggressively now that it's the only defense we have.
Related: Browse All Posts on "North Korea"
We are at a cross-roads. Iran is deadly serious. The path of diplomacy sounds high-minded but has achieved nothing year after year, while Iran enriches uranium, tests missiles, and perfects its nuclear weapons capability. More diplomacy means dithering, delay, destruction and death.
Do you remember the surprise attacks of September 11, 2001? Do you want to relive it -- only in a far, far worse way?
"Americans have known surprise attacks, but never before on thousands of civilians."
"All of this was brought upon us in a single day, and night fell on a different world, a world where freedom itself is under attack."
We don't have to relive it, if we act in time.
"As long as the United States of America is determined and strong, this will not be an age of terror. This will be an age of liberty here and across the world." (George W. Bush, Speech to Congress, September 20, 2001)
A USAF F18 fighter shows how it's done above Jones Beach in Long Island, New York.
The sound barrier? Not a problem!
Are you ready to break out?
"Don't wait. The time will never be just right." (Napoleon Hill)
Authors: Gina Cobb Democracy Rules Gawfer
Want to be a guest author? Email ginacobbfeedback "at" yahoo.com
Recent Comments