Obviously hurrying the Iraq attack through congress was wrong. Whenever a
"salesman" (in this case, the president) is saying to hurry and
"buy" this deal I always grab my wallet and back out of the room. It
is good to take the time to study this issue. Republicans and Democrats are
both stating a reason for the treaty is to have renewed verification of arsenal
levels in Russia. Obviously there is distrust of Russia. Shouldn't we make
sure the treaty will actually provide verification?
Some will oppose whatever the president proposes, for as long as he proposes it.
In the meantime, there is NO agreement with Russia, and NO on-site inspections
taking place. I would think that alone would scare those who think Russia is
still under Communist Party rule into following the smartest Republicans, such
as Lugar and Scowcroft, who support the treaty. As for "hurrying"
things through Congress, that's exactly what I said about attacking Iraq. I
wonder what KM thought THEN?
"imperative?" Here we go again with the "this deal won't last,
pass it!" rhetoric. This means it is imperative that we stop this
imperative as quickly as possible. No legislation should be hurried
(imperative) through. We should consider things a bit longer... I think.