Final Push for World Government

A very real threat to the national security of the United States is developing and very few people even seem concerned about it. It is called the START Treaty, and Barack Obama is desperately trying to ramrod it through the lame duck session of Congress. Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed to the terms of the treaty back in April, and two-thirds of the U.S. Senate must vote for it in order for the treaty to become law. So what is so bad about the treaty? Well, for starters, it almost totally defangs the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal that has protected us for the past six decades, it puts serious restrictions on the ability of the United States to develop any kind of missile defense, and it puts the U.S. military at a very significant strategic disadvantage... If World War III were to break out over the next decade, the United States would very likely find itself facing a Chinese/Russian alliance. The combined conventional military forces of China and Russia are far superior to those of the United States. The only major advantage that we had was our edge in strategic weaponry, and this treaty would greatly weaken that advantage. - End of the American Dream, 9 Reasons Why The START Treaty Must Be Stopped, December 20, 2010

From the "You Can't Write This" Department: UN Security Council Okays Iraq's Civilian Nuclear Program

December 20, 2010

Crooks and Liars - I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one:

At the urging of the United States, the United Nations Security Council passed on Wednesday a resolution permitting Iraq to have a civilian nuclear program.

The resolution, which also lifted prohibitions on exports to Iraq of certain materials that could be used to develop nuclear and other unconventional weapons, was one of several U.S.-backed measures to end restrictions that dated from before the invasion that removed Saddam Hussein from power.

The Council's action represented a retreat from its earlier position that it would not lift the nuclear restrictions unless Baghdad accepted an additional protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that provides for more intrusive international inspections. The Council's action in affirming Iraq's right to a peaceful nuclear program is ironic in view of the obsessive campaign to deny the country on its eastern border the same right.

This is one more demonstration of the hypocrisy and inconsistency that characterize much nonproliferation policy, especially as it relates to the Middle East. What ostensibly is a concern about a certain category of weapons is actually much more a concern about the coloration and even the rhetoric of certain regimes that might get those weapons.

Considering that the Bush administration used the threat of a looming mushroom cloud of a reconstituted Iraqi nuclear program to justify its invasion and occupation of the country and not a week goes by without some pundit fear mongering on Iran's nuclear capability, the news that the UN has approved Iraq's civilian nuclear program is more than a little bizarre.

Okay, so let me see if I get this straight: Iran, with a democratically elected president (nutty as he may be), is a threat to us in developing a nuclear energy program. But Iraq, with a fragile government installed despite clear evidence of electoral fraud and corruption, their nuclear program is just fine.

Alrighty then. Anyone else seeing this biting us in the ass in the decades to come?

Obama Lobbying Senators for Ratification of Nuclear Disarmament Treaty with Russia

December 20, 2010

Bloomberg - President Barack Obama and members of his administration lobbied senators to ratify a nuclear arms treaty with Russia, as his spokesman expressed confidence the accord would be approved this week.

During debate over the weekend, the Senate defeated two Republican-sponsored amendments that would have scuttled the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, know as New Start, one of the Senate’s last major pieces of business before adjournment.

“The White House believes that before Congress leaves town, that the Senate will ratify the New Start treaty,” press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters today in Washington. “The president and the vice president continue to communicate with senators.”

Some top Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, are expressing reservations and pushing to delay consideration until next year.

“If you really want to have a chance of passing Start, you’d better start over,” Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and a member of the Armed Services Committee, said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” program yesterday.

Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have been making calls to senators since the weekend to press senators on ratification, Gibbs said.

Gibbs refused to say whether the administration had won commitments from any Republicans to vote for the treaty, which requires a two-thirds majority to win ratification. He said opposition from McConnell wasn’t a surprise and didn’t alter the administration’s calculations of support.

Expressions of Confidence

He joined with other treaty backers in expressing confidence the treaty would be approved.

“I believe it will pass, and I believe there will be a vote” before the end of the year, Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said on ABC’s “This Week” program.

Obama has made ratification of the treaty his top foreign- policy priority during the post-election lame-duck session. Democrats, who now control 58 votes in the 100-member Senate, will have a narrower majority in the next Congress starting in January, which might make ratification more difficult.

Gibbs said the concerns of Republicans had been addressed during 18 committee hearings and the public availability of the treaty’s text for eight months.

“We feel very confident that all their questions have good answers,” he said.

State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said “any objections at this point are more about politics than substance.”

Missile Defense

Among the issues raised by treaty opponents, including McConnell, is whether the accord would limit U.S. development of a missile defense. Obama sent a letter to McConnell Dec. 18 saying that the treaty won’t hinder the U.S. from deploying such a system in Europe.

“The New Start Treaty places no limitations on the development or deployment of our missile defense programs,” Obama wrote. “We are proceeding apace with a missile defense system in Europe designed to provide full coverage for NATO members on the continent, as well as deployed U.S. forces, against the growing threat posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles.”

McConnell and Arizona Republican Jon Kyl said that letter doesn’t relieve their concerns, and appealed to Obama not to push for a vote this year.

“I don’t think this is the best time to be doing this, members are uneasy with it,” McConnell said yesterday on CNN.

Treaty Supporters

Military commanders and defense and nuclear officials have testified that the accord doesn’t limit missile-defense options in the countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and that it improves the ability to verify Russia’s adherence to agreed-upon weapons thresholds.

The accord has also been endorsed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush as well as current and former U.S. military commanders and Cabinet secretaries, including Henry Kissinger and Colin Powell.

The treaty, replacing an agreement that expired last December, limits each side’s strategic warheads to no more than 1,550, from 2,200 allowed previously, and sets a maximum of 800 land-, air- and sea-based launchers. Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the accord in April.

The Senate voted 66-32 on Dec. 15 to begin consideration of the treaty, highlighting how narrow a majority Obama and his Democratic Party may have for an accord that requires two-thirds of the senators present and voting -- 67, if all 100 are in the chamber -- for approval.

WW3 and the 70-year Generation Cycle

December 19, 2010

Canadafirst (ScarletWhore.com) - It’s Biblical. It’s Cosmological. And it’s Manifest Destiny. The Great Whore and the Greatest Nation on the Earth is again about to enter a time of blood sacrifice. The United States of America is the great contradiction. Maybe Sir Winston Churchill summed it up best:

"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else."

In many ways America has always failed in the Ultimate test. There were a lot of hawks at the end of WW2 that pushed for the Allies to continue to Moscow and Beijing and end the scourge of the growing Communist threat. The American/British Empire held the mastery to such an overwhelming degree that a few decisive battles would have quickly ended any resistance from Communist Russia or China. The Nuclear card would not have had to been played.

The US was the only nuclear power for a few short years… that threat alone would have assured battlefield domination. There would have been no Iron curtain nor tens of millions of deaths in the Stalinist purge. There would have been no Korean War nor 60 years of systemic genocide in North Korea. There would have been no Vietnam and Cambodia killing fields. No Cuban Missile crisis. No Soviet backed Arab War on Israel.

If General Patton and General MacArthur had been allowed, they would have finished the job with freedom and democracy being delivered right to the doorstep of Moscow and Beijing.

The world is about to enter an era of Nuclear conflagrations that originate in conflicts that stem from that failures of post WW2 Allied policies. The only War that the United States properly finished was the War on itself, the American Civil War of 1861-1865.

The lifespan of man:

"The days of our years are threescore years and ten [70 years]; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away." (Psalm 90:10)

US Civil War started in 1861. The U.S. entered the Second World War in 1941. Eighty Years between. My logic is that the Generational lifespan of people was stronger in those old days than in the last 70 years of easy living.

1941-2011. Seventy Years. How many people today can identify with the reasons that led the World in to WW2. The pacification of Tyrants and Dictators who were allowed to build huge arsenals of deadly weapons was the reason 100 million people died from 1939-1945. Here we go again.

It’s real simple. If an American led Western coalition had done the right thing and invaded North Korea and Iran 10 years ago, the World would be a different place. Now these Egomaniacs have Nukes and Missiles and the ability to draw Superpowers into the next World War.

Procrastination will be the death of us.

Times up. Karma and the Universe have closed the Window. We didn’t do it the easy way (and save tens of millions of lives), and now we will have to do it by blood.