START Treaty to Bring All National Military Forces Under the Control of the United Nations
START Treaty is Really the United Nations Global Military Regime Treaty
December 17, 2010Sic Sempter Tyrannis - With little notice from the average joe on the street, the plan for complete and total disarmament in a supposedly peaceful world continues its way toward completion. Known as the START Treaty, the agenda to turn over total military control to the United Nations is being carried out by the Obama administration, in cooperation of the Russian government and the United Nations body.
The Senate is expected as early as Wednesday to discuss the ratification of the treaty with the Russian government, as soon as the tax package is taken care of stated Harry Reid on Tuesday.
And in order to keep the guise of fighting for the American people, the right side of the “two headed- one party” system has their republicans who have stepped up to “oppose” the Treaty. When asked, however, if the 67 votes needed to ratify the treaty were there, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was confident that the 67 votes were assured.
“To have transparency, to understand the rules by which to put structure to that activity, we need START and we need it badly,” said General James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at a White House briefing.
White House Press Secretary (for the Obama Ministry of Truth) Robert Gibbs said Friday that the chamber would remain in session this year for as long as necessary to ratify the START agreement.
Of course through the years, the United States and Russia has played out the “cold war” operation scaring the hell out of the masses with the threat of Nuclear Annihilation, and with the intent of convincing the nations to sign treaties reducing nuclear stockpiles to almost nothing while at the same time giving more authority to the rogue criminal organization called the United Nations.
According to a little discussed document known as “Department of State Publication 7277, published in 1961 during the Kennedy administration, and titled “Freedom from War : The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World”, the real agenda is to bring all national military forces under the control of the United Nations.
The name of this force, according to the document, would be called The United Nations Peace Force, and would be comprised of internal police/military forces of each of the countries of the world.
Under the section DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES the document states:
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:
• The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
• The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
• The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
• The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations. (emphasis mine)
Whenever the START Treaty is mentioned in the news, however, the emphasis has been to refer to the first START Treaty beginning under Republican President Ronald Reagan in Geneva on 29 June 1982, as if to remind us of the fact that it was the Right that started the process of this grand and noble undertaking of ridding the world of war. (This helps Obama in his speeches to gain support from the current warmongering Neocon element of the left-right paradigm).
If we go back in time however, we can see the beginnings of this treaty actually starting under Democratic President Kennedy. In a speech Kennedy gave in front of the United Nations delegates, he stressed the importance of the United Nations’ role saying:
“For in the development of this organization rests the only true alternative to war….”
The “only true alternative” he was referring to is for the complete disarmament of all nation-states with the exception of a military force controlled by the U.N., comprised of internal “police” forces from all countries.
Also in publication 7277, it further states under the section titled GOVERNING PRINCIPLES:
• As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security…….Since 1967, the total amount of Nuclear weapons between the U.S. and Russia combined has went from 60,000 nuclear weapons down to the U.S. having only 1,900, and Russia having 2,000. That breaks down to about a reduction of 1,322 nuclear weapons per year over the last 43years. I would consider that a rapid process in the scheme of things.• Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible, until it is completed………..(emphasis mine)
The document describes a total of three stages to be carried out while at the same time strengthening international institutions. This is also being accomplished in such institutions as the United Nations, NATO, the International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, Bank of International Settlements, and through many Non Governmental Organizations.
In STAGE I, some of the objectives are:
• The reduction of strategic delivery vehicles
• The reduction of arms and armed forces
• The strengthening of U.N. Peace-keeping powers
In stage I, the document proposes reducing the United States and Russian Armed forces to 2.1 million per each country. The amount of weapons of all descriptions would correspondingly be reduced as well. Currently the U.S. has about 2.5 million troops, while Russia has about 21.5 million troops.
STAGE II describes the establishment of a permanent international peace force within the United Nations, as well as
• the dismantling or conversion of certain military bases and facilities wherever located……(emphasis mine)
I believe this can be considered another step that has been accomplished here in the U.S. under the REX 84 program and HR 645 with the conversion of certain U.S. military bases into civilian inmate labor camps.
Given the fact that there are around 20 countries in the world that currently have little to no military forces, that leaves about 175 country that do have forces. If you add together the current combined numbers of all 175 countries’ military forces (with Russia, US, China, India, Vietnam, North and South Korea, and Iran at a top out of 2.1 million) then we come to a total force of 47,354,590 troops. These troops from all 175 countries would be under the control of the United Nations.
In STAGE III :
• States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace Force.
• The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
• The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.(emphasis mine)
At the completion of this stage, the U.N. will in effect be the henchman and enforcer for the New World Global Regime, posing as “Peace Keepers”. Here in the U.S. we have the completed part of this stage that mentions forces that would keep “internal order” in their respective countries. Our internal force is called the Department of HOMELAND (Internal) Security. All of the other departments and agencies have been combined through the Patriot and Military Commissions Act, etc.
To bring home the point of the power of the United Nations at the completion of Stage III the document asserts:
If you consider the fact that there are approximately 6.5 billion inhabitants on the earth, this would then mean that only about 7% of the world’s population would be armed. Or to put it another way, about 93% of the world’s population would be UNARMED! This would then be the ideal position for the population reduction measures that have been talked about by the likes of Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, Bill Gates, and every other globalist criminal!In stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force and all international disputes would be settled according to the agreed principles of international conduct.(emphasis mine)
The current START Treaty being pushed by Barry Seotoro and the Politburo Senate -House- Congress Regime is one that definitely needs to be the STOPPED Treaty!!!
You will not hear anyone else telling this story, especially the main stream media Ministry of Truth.
Democrats Beat Back GOP Efforts to Alter Nuclear Disarmament Treaty with Russia
December 20, 2010AP – Senate Democrats have turned back Republican efforts to change a new arms control treaty with Russia. By a vote of 64-33, the Senate rejected a measure that would have increased the number of weapons inspectors. If adopted, the amendment would have effectively killed the treaty, forcing U.S. and Russian officials back to negotiations.
Eight Republicans voted against the amendment.
By a vote of 64-33, the Senate also rejected an amendment to increase the number of deployed launchers. The measure would have had the same impact on the treaty.
Democrats have managed to beat back four GOP amendments to the treaty. Earlier Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov (SEHR'-gay LAHV'-rahf) had warned against any changes to the treaty.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information.
START Treaty Debate Increasingly Testy in Senate
December 20, 2010Reuters – Debate in the Senate over President Barack Obama's strategic nuclear arms treaty with Russia grew increasingly testy on Monday but the White House expressed confidence lawmakers would approve the accord before their Christmas break.
Republican senators pushed for passage of a series of amendments in an effort to kill the New START nuclear arms treaty by forcing a renegotiation with Russia. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned in an interview with Interfax that any amendment would be a deal-breaker.
The treaty, which would cut deployed strategic atomic weapons to 1,550 for each side within seven years, is one of President Barack Obama's top priorities for the current legislative session. The White House said the president was calling senators to line up support...
Senate Is Debating the New START Treaty Now in Open Session
December 19, 2010C‑SPAN2 - The Senate is debating the START Treaty now on c-SPAN2 (open session began 10am ET).
At 11:45am ET, John Kerry tried to cut off the debate and rush a vote, emphasizing that they'd only had seven votes after six days of debate and "Christmas is coming." Just yesterday he said they are 'prepared' to stay through Christmas (see story below).
At 12:45pm ET, Kerry urged the rejection of Thune's and Inhofe's amendments to the START treaty: the Thune amendment on warhead limits (#4841) and the Inhofe amendment on verification (#4833) (see next story).
At 12:50pm ET, Bob Casey (D-PA) said there is a sense of urgency to vote on and ratify this treaty.
In the afternoon, the Senate goes into a closed session, scheduled by Majority Ldr. Harry Reid (D-NV) for 2pm ET.
Talking Point on the Thune and Inhofe Amendments
December 20, 2010Before It's News - As floor action on New START enters its sixth day, Majority Leader Reid just announced that the Senate today will consider two amendments: The Thune amendment on warhead limits (#4841) and the Inhofe amendment on verification (#4833). Below are some responses to each amendment:
Thune Amendment 4841 WARHEAD LIMITS seeks to increase the limits on the number of deployed strategic delivery vehicles (ICBMs, SLBMs, and Heavy Bombers) from 700 to 720.
Response:
- The U.S. military believes that the central limit of 700 deployed strategic nuclear delivery vehicles is enough to sustain a robust and flexible nuclear triad without altering current or planned basing arrangements. As Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright has stated: “I believe the treaty limitation of 700 deployed strategic delivery vehicles imposed by New START provides a sound framework for maintaining stability and allows us to maintain a strong and credible deterrent that ensures our national security while moving to lower levels of strategic nuclear forces.”
- Altering the central limits of the treaty via amendment would kill the treaty because Russia would surely reject the change, forcing the treaty to be renegotiated.
- Under New START the U.S. will maintain the following force structure of deployed strategic nuclear delivery vehicles: up to 240 SLBMs on distributed among 14 SSBNs; up to 420 ICBMs; and up to 60 nuclear-capable bombers. The planned force of 720 deployed delivery vehicles will eventually need to be reduced to 700, which the U.S. could do by moving 20 delivery vehicles to non-deployed status (as allowed by New START’s limit of 800 deployed and non-deployed strategic nuclear launchers). The treaty limits must be met seven years are entry into force, so the U.S. military has until that time to make any final decisions on how it plans to meet the treaty limits.
- The Obama administration has announced a plan to spend $100 billion over the next ten years to sustain and modernize all three legs of the triad.
Response:
- The U.S. military and intelligence community believes that the number of allowed inspections is sufficient to verify Russia’s compliance with the New START limits. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen testified that, “in totality, I’m very comfortable with the verification regime that exists in the treaty right now.”Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has echoed similar sentiments: “I think the earlier, the sooner, the better [for New START]. You know, my thing is: From an intelligence perspective only, are we better off with it or without it? We're better off with it.”
- Altering the number of inspections in the treaty via amendment would kill the treaty because Russia would surely reject the change, forcing the treaty to be renegotiated. Without the treaty there would be zero on-site inspections of Russia’s nuclear arsenal.
- New START allows for up to 18 annual on-site inspections per year, including direct monitoring of Russia’s deployed nuclear warheads. While this is a smaller number of inspections than the 28 inspections allowed under START I, New START’s ten “Type One” inspections at bases for deployed missiles and bombers can verify data that required two inspections under START I. Coupled with the eight “Type Two” inspections of non-deployed systems, the 18 New START inspections are actually equivalent to 28 inspections under START I. What’s more, New START’s inspections only have to cover 35 Russian sites, whereas START I covered 70 sites in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. In sum, as Admiral Mullen notes, under New START “there are almost twice as many inspections per facility, per year than under the previous treaty.”
- Concerns that the New START verification regime is weaker than START I’s verification regime are unfounded. While New START draws upon much of what was in START I, the new treaty contains new limits and rules which reflect the fact that the U.S.-Russia nuclear relationship is different than it was when START I was negotiated at the close of the Cold War. New rules and limits in turn require verification provisions that are actually pegged to those new rules and limits. In the view of Admiral Mullen, the “verification regime that exists in [the New START Treaty] is in ways, better than the one that has existed in the past.” He also stated he is “convinced that the verification regime is as stringent as it is transparent…and born of more than 15 years of lessons learned under the original START Treaty.”
Sen. Kerry 'Prepared' to Stay through Christmas for New START Treaty (Video)
December 19, 2010NECN/CNN - It's one of many issues facing Congressional lawmakers as the clock ticks on the lameduck session of Congress.
A proposed nuclear arms treaty with Russia, known as New START, would resume inspections of U-S and Russian nuclear arsenals.
The top lawmaker on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hopes the treaty can be ratified before Christmas (click article title to view video).
"We believe that this has been given enormous, reasonable time," said Sen. John Kerry. "We're prepared to stay here, but it's really up to, uh... it's up to those who have issues as to how long we're going to stay. We believe we can get through the remaining amendments, we'll be here today, we'll be here tomorrow, and the next day, and hopefully everybody can go home for Christmas."Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has accused the White House of trying to rush the measure through the full Senate.
McConnell admits that the members of the Foreign Relations Committee have spent more time looking at the treaty.
New START needs approval from two-thirds of the Senate to be ratified.
- NWO Crony Kerry Says New-START will improve our nation's security
- Kerry: We 'Must do our jobs' and ratify START treaty (Video)
- Kerry says momentum building for START treaty vote in December
- Beware Santa's Secret Legislation (Congress Jamming-through Controversial Legislation Just Before Christmas Break)
No comments:
Post a Comment