Impeach George W. Bush Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: MSI who wrote (12683)	5/26/2002 4:07:49 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) of 93284

I would hope that with the text fairly new, we'll start seeing some editorials on the subject this weekend. I don't expect that a lot of the public actually pulls the text of the treaty. I don't recall how many times over the last year I've heard the Administration say that a treaty that isn't verifiable isn't worth the paper it's printed on. But I suspect that 'position' has dropped out of their vocabulary. Other than the points I raised in the previous post, this particular agreement is a step back from what Clinton and Yeltsin agreed to. Clinton and Yeltsin agreed in principle to remove delivery vehicles and weapons from the inventory. The agreement that Bush offers falls far short of that agreement. I have read some analysis on the treaty that the language [as poor as it is] allows each side to interpret the reductions as reflected by 'deployed forces'. That may seem a small point, but it allows an accounting trick, sic, if a side recalls a nuclear capable sub into dock for retrofit of the kitchen...those weapons are no longer deployed hence, they don't count. Though it did make a nice photo-op. jttmab

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next