Thursday, October 28, 2010 - 2:15 PM

Republican California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger returned from a trip to Moscow with Silicon Valley executives with a strong message for those who are fighting against ratification of the New START nuclear treaty with Russia.
"There are those in America that are trying to flex their muscles and pretend they're ballsy by saying, ‘we've got to keep those nuclear weapons,'" the governator told the U.S.-Russia Business Council Oct. 21. "[They think] that's very rugged, when you say that. It's not rugged at all. It's an idiot that says that. It's stupid to say that."
He praised President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for signing the agreement to reduce both countries' stockpiles of nuclear weapons and said they were in the tradition of the arms control efforts by former President Ronald Reagan and his Secretary of State George Shultz.
He called on the Senate to ratify the treaty during the post election lame duck session in Congress, as the administration has been pushing for.
"So as soon as the election is over we've all got to concentrate so that Congress makes their move forward and does that so that we can go and live in a safer world. That's the most important thing," said Schwarzenegger.
He blamed the delay in ratifying the treaty on Congressional paralysis in the run up to the Nov. 2 election. "Now Congress has to go and agree with that and ratify it… They haven't done that because there is a paralysis in Washington, which is the sad story when you live here."
So who exactly is the former body builder turned movie star turned politician calling ballsy idiots? Well, four Senators came out against publicly START by voting against in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: John Barrasso (R-WY), James Risch (R-ID), Roger Wicker (R-MS), and James Inhofe (R-OK).
South Carolina senator and Tea Party funder Jim DeMint is a vocal opponent of New START, although he did not show up for the committee vote on the treaty. DeMint is an avowed skeptic of the U.S. effort to reset relations with Russia, which he still sometimes confuses with the Soviet Union.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking Republican Richard Lugar (R-IN), the administration's key (and only) GOP Senate ally on New START, told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations on Wednesday that a vote during the lame duck session might not be in the cards if Republicans score big gains on Nov. 2.
"I have no idea what the results of the election will be, but in the event that there are very substantial changes and many of them on the Republican side, some will say, ‘This [treaty] is something that we really haven't had a chance to get into and study, and we want more time,'" Lugar said, according to The Hill.
Meanwhile, Barrasso on Wednesday explicitly linked the New START treaty with an incident on Saturday morning where, according to the Atlantic, an ICBM squadron "went on the blink." The result was that 50 ICBM's were unavailable for launch for a short time. Some in the GOP seem to be adding this to the very long list of concerns they have with the treaty.
"The accident shows that the United States has far more nuclear weapons than it needs for any conceivable military mission. Even without the 50 ICBMs, the United States had 400 other ICBMs similarly armed ready to launch within 15 minutes," said Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, which supports ratification. "It also has 1500 additional warheads on 12 Trident submarines and a fleet of bombers ready to go. The New Start treaty trims that overkill capacity by a few hundred weapons over 7 years. We will still have enough destructive force in the US arsenal to destroy the planet."
AFP/Getty Images
EXPLORE:EUROPE, DIPLOMACY, NUKES, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, RUSSIA, STATE DEPARTMENT, U.S. CONGRESS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
in part, that beause those 50 missiles went "on the blink", the US could have been caight with their pants down and something horrible could have happened, so we shouldn't reduce nuclear weapon stockpiles.
Because the US, for a while, lost the capability to single-handidly destroy the whole world once over, while still maintaining the ability to destroy it another 3 or 4 times, is... bad??? So we shouldn't get rid of any nuclear weapons???
How can this even be a discussion point???
Seriously?
Arnold is over his head. It is interesting that everytime he disagrees with someone he turns to name calling. It suggests a deep inferiority complex. Pump some iron Arnold and quit pumping your mouth.
New Start is a bad idea, the worst of the Obama Agenda. That it is not being discussed in detailed or analyzed by the media shows how deficit the United States has become in strategic thinking.
All government officials should read Barbara Tuchman's "The March of Folly" to gain some insight into the USA circa 2010. We, the United States of America, must do better. We are marching toward the cliff and Armold and his ilk celebrate it! That is the reality. Who is the idiot speaks for itself. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck - we must know it to be a duck.
For what reason does the United States need thousands upon thousands of nuclear weapons? Who is the threat to our country? Is it Russia with their thousands of warheads? No. The threat is terrorism and this START treaty is important in a long term attempt to limit easy access to weapons or enriched uranium. Im not worried about an ICBM, those have return addresses, Im worried about one bomb in a cargo container. Explain to me how the U.S. stockpile will deter Bin Laden from letting one off in Washington or New York.
The US have more than enough nukes, the reduction only reflect the less danger from big states like Russia. That money can be much better expended in fight terrorism.
The most compelling argument for START
is that American inspectors have not been in Russia to inspect their arsenal since the treaty expired last December. We used to be able to monitor what the Russians were doing. Now, and if the Senate GOP has its way, we will not have this capability. These Senators are operating on shoddy knowledge of foreign policy and the technical aspects of nuclear defence. They will not listen to experts, will not listen to logic, and are clinging to their neo-conservative constructivist mindset of American hegemony and the evil of Russia instead of operating with a mind towards enlightened mutual self-interest and providing the US with meaningful and verifiable guarantees of its security.
(5)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE