Ratify New START treaty

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • r_r Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 18, 2010 12:40 p.m.


    If START is so disastrous for US missile defense capabilities why did Gen. Patrick O' Reilly who heads the Missile Defense Agency testify before congress that New START actually reduces constraints on the development of the missile defense program [that were present in the 1991 START agreement]?

    If START is so damaging to missile defense why is it adamantly supported by the man in charge of the Missile Defense Agency?

    Senator Hatch should heed the advice of Sec. of Defense Robert Gates, the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, and the Commander of Strategic Command by supporting the prompt ratification of New START in the lame duck session.

  • Richie Saint George, UT
    Nov. 17, 2010 12:16 p.m.

    This disastrous plan limits our own missile defense capabilities and severely weakens our national security. President Obama claims START will reduce nuclear weapons, in fact, it will only lead to more nuclear weapons in the hand of rogue countries like Iran and North Korea, countries who want to destroy us. For that matter, China and Russia are not our friends either.

  • Bobo Magna, UT
    Nov. 16, 2010 7:57 p.m.

    There may be only one nation with a considerably dangerous arsenal of nukes which threatens us today, but in the near future China will surely be in the club. It would be folly to disarm thinking that somehow the future will present no threats to us. China is becoming more aggressive and belligerent and wishes to challenge the U.S. militarily.

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 16, 2010 1:58 p.m.

    This treaty should not be on the agenda of the lame duck session of congress. It should be taken up and given proper scrutiny when the new congress begins in January.

  • All American Herriman, UT
    Nov. 16, 2010 9:34 a.m.

    The Deseret News needs to do more research before condoning this START treaty. It is being "bought" by the Obama administration with money they have no authority to promise. The Senate needs access to the negotiating record that includes all draft versions of New START, memoranda, notes, and communications between U.S. and Russian negotiators. This record is critical to clear up questions on key provisions in the treaty and, specifically, how the Russians interpret them. The Senate is constitutionally mandated to give due diligence in its consideration of New START. This responsibility is not consistent with the rushed process the White House is seeking.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 16, 2010 7:46 a.m.

    The New START Treaty addresses strategic nuclear weapons, but it does not address tactical nuclear weapons. Russia has at about 2,000 operation tactical nuclear weapons and about 3,400 in reserve. The United States has about 400 operational tactical nuclear weapons and about 400 in reserve.

    Tactical nuclear weapons are small and less destructive than strategic nuclear weapons, but it would only take one 'suitcase' nuclear weapon in the hands of terrorists to cause great damage.

    Leaving tactical nuclear weapons out of the treaty serves no purpose. There is enough destructive force in those weapons to destroy entire countries. They must be included in the treaty before any Senator can, in good conscience, vote to ratify the New START Treaty.