Obama's traitorous act

[LDB]

Not only did Obama agree to a new START treaty that is more beneficial to Russia than to the U.S. he obtained their signature by revealing classified information about British nuclear capabilities. What a class act he is. POS is several steps higher than that guy. He can't be taken out soon enough but then he never should have been voted in. How's that hope and change working for you now you MORONS.

Undermining Allies - Page 1 - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative

 

[OntarioVanMan]

The confirming article...

WikiLeaks cables: US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets - Telegraph

 

[Pilgrim]

The most shameful thing about this disclosure is that the mainstream media is totally ignoring it. Of course if they had been even reasonably objective in their coverage and modestly thorough in their investigative reporting on Barack Hussein Obama during the presidential campaign he would never have been nominated in the first place. I'll say it again - he was the most inexperienced and unqualified presidential candidate the country's ever had; now he's well on his way to being the worst president the country's ever had. His foreign policy seems centered around the theme that the US should neither be trusted by its allies nor feared by its enemies.

 

[greg334]

I have been told my posts are not the best they could be but I think things like this are the reason you are seeing mine with a changed attitude.

First thing that comes to mind is this; it seems many hope to find something so bad that is done by Obama or one of his people that they can scream in mass that he has to go - wishful thinking I think.

Second thing is this is business as usual, secrets are only secrets to the public when it comes down to weapons and policies. The Russians without a doubt have no problem with their intelligence gathering capabilities for both the US and the UK 'secrets' (among most of the world I might add) which negates the "foul" cry that comes out of these things by many looking to find anything on Obama. They already know what we know and what the Brits know, so what is the big deal - every president since Nixon has used information as a bargaining chip in treaty negotiations.

The third and most important thing is the New Start treaty is needed, not a give away, or something that damages the country but it is needed for a lot of reasons. It isn't the best treaty but what one is because they are a compromise of ideals and needs.

Obama committing a traitorous act, where?

 

[LDB]

traitor –noun 1. a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.

I'd say he betrayed a trust with our ally. That makes him a traitor. As good as intelligence agencies may be, I don't believe they know everything and there probably are things a trusted ally could know that others wouldn't. That leads, of course, to the foolishness of any ally sharing any information with Obama. The 3 surest ways to spread information/gossip/etc. used to be telephone, telegraph, tell a woman. Now they are telephone, telegraph, tell Obama.

 

[greg334]

I don't see it at all because this is all about diplomatic business, I think if it was so important, than there would be a lot more noise from across the pond. There is more of a 'betrayal' by our press who were/are embedded in military units than there has been with Obama/Bush.

However, I see the same type of focus on Obama does/says as it was with Bush.

 

[layoutshooter]

"The third and most important thing is the New Start treaty is needed, not a give away, or something that damages the country but it is needed for a lot of reasons. It isn't the best treaty but what one is because they are a compromise of ideals and needs. "

Needed? Why? I believe it WAS a give away. I also want to know just how much we are PAYING Russia this time? WE, the U.S. taxpayers, spend a TON of money to Russia to pay for their disarming. Now Russia is modernizing their weapons, WE are not. Fewer weapons does not equal security. Even when the "number" of warheads are equal.

It was a pretty "coversheet" that was released to the public. I doubt that the "real treaty" is as "cute".

 

[greg334]

Dude, we've been over this a few times.

The treaty doesn't prevent us from modernizing our weapons systems, our lack of forward modernizing comes from the administration and the congress and then it is only the nukes and other mass damage weapons that need it.

I don't see Russia as the threat greater than the internal threat we have within our congress and administration.

Part of that threat is illustrate in the dog and pony show of the republican PAC going on right now. They seem to be lost in this conservative world that is not what they want it to appear to be. The Tea Party outside of the vehicle to get elected - the republican party - is actually screaming libertarian values, not Reagan conservative values and they seem to miss all of that which dilutes the entire progress that they could make by ousting the old guard and getting in people who will not worry about what poll is saying, just doing what they think is right.

 

[layoutshooter]

But why do we NEED it? I don't get the NEED part. What is the cost to us in dollars? We can't afford to keep paying the Russians to disarm/modernize, the taxpayers here are being ripped off. Nothing new.

 

[greg334]

Because we need the access- isn't that clear?

If we didn't renegotiate the treaty, our access to their systems would be shut to us and our intelligence gathering would be more difficult on some levels and impossible on others without access both on the front end of the treaty and in the background.

Ever seen the movie The Sum of all Fears?

 

[layoutshooter]

Because we need the access- isn't that clear?

If we didn't renegotiate the treaty, our access to their systems would be shut to us and our intelligence gathering would be more difficult on some levels and impossible on others without access both on the front end of the treaty and in the background.

Ever seen the movie The Sum of all Fears?

No, never seen the movie. Not into "Nuke Fiction" Spent far too much time in "nuke reality". Started the book, lost interest. Red October had some "real stuff" in it, none of his other stuff I read did.

Other than a few people on the ground the treaty will make little difference on the intell side. That last one did not and I doubt this one will. We know where the "fixed" resources are. We kinda know where the mobile resources are. Our job is just to insure that they are never used. This treaty will do nothing for that goal, maybe even make it more likely that they COULD be used. Just my "gut" telling me that.

 

[greg334]

I know you know what I'm about to say makes sense.

Intelligence gathering is not just about the system or the policies but the people too. Access is more than just access and using the open door, there are other things that go way way beyond the treaty that protect us and allow us to have a heads up with other things that matter.

You know the Russian political mind and how distrusting they can be because of the nature of their system so there is a level of trust that does matter with a number of 'independent like minded people' like those in the scientific world who ensure the mechanics of the treaty is working and are not reachable by those politically minded.

Think about that and watch the movie or better yet read the book.

 

[layoutshooter]

I know you know what I'm about to say makes sense.

Intelligence gathering is not just about the system or the policies but the people too. Access is more than just access and using the open door, there are other things that go way way beyond the treaty that protect us and allow us to have a heads up with other things that matter.

You know the Russian political mind and how distrusting they can be because of the nature of their system so there is a level of trust that does matter with a number of 'independent like minded people' like those in the scientific world who ensure the mechanics of the treaty is working and are not reachable by those politically minded.

Think about that and watch the movie or better yet read the book.

Greg, I know a thing or two about intell, treaty monitoring and Soviet systems. Yeah, I know what you are saying. Just don't agree all that much. As to that book, there is a Russian term that describes it quite well. I don't think the "site censor software" will let it through, but here it goes. It was a bunch of
"BullSHEETSKI"

 

[layoutshooter]

Link to my primary target for five years:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/icbm/rt-2pm.htm


A picture of it: