This is topic Obama's Friends and Enemies in forum General Comments at The Ornery American Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.ornery.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/6/14751.html

Posted by starLisa (Member # 2543) on :
 
Link

When you see it all listed together, it's even more appalling. There's no way that Obama isn't doing this on purpose. I am just so sick of people making excuses for him.
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
The way he blithely rattles off the lie about the trident missile information doesn't do much for his credibility or honesty on the other points he tries to raise where he's not otherwise obviously being misleading or hawkish. It is amusing to see him repeating some of the same unfounded assertions as we see coming from G2 as if simply asserting them were enough to be proof that they were true, specifically in regards to Egypt.
 
Posted by TommySama (Member # 2780) on :
 
I love that an American is taking the side of the queen to attack an American president... Because he got her an ipod. What do you even buy a queen? Personally, I would get out the crayons and draw her a very heart felt picture. Not very expensive, but I'm sure she would love the opportunity to see her nation's children beginning to get involved in art.
 
Posted by TommySama (Member # 2780) on :
 
"That bastard didn't even put the new Justin Bieber album on here! Close the embassy in America, we're going to war."
 
Posted by DonaldD (Member # 1052) on :
 
That guy and G2 need to debate whether Obama was wrong for not supporting Mubarak for 6 months or whether he was wrong for not urging Mubarak to leave.

And of course whether the whole world, every single ally, now distrust the USA because of one or the other position.

I am a bit surprised the intrepid narrator didn't ejaculate all over the picture of the pope and then president Reagan, however. Maybe he already wiped it off.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
[LOL]
 
Posted by starLisa (Member # 2543) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
The way he blithely rattles off the lie about the trident missile information

What "lie"?
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by starLisa:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
The way he blithely rattles off the lie about the trident missile information

What "lie"?
That is was anything new (it was a continuation of an agreement from the previous START treaty). That the British objected to it at all (They objected to use giving out deployment information, which we didn't hand over, this is just our basic arms trafficking information). Trying to make a scandal out if it is an outright lie that depends on ignorance of prior agreements and outright fact distortion.
 
Posted by JWatts (Member # 6523) on :
 
Here are some actual reports:
quote:
In order to get Russia to agree to the New START nuclear-weapons treaty, the United States reportedly agreed to tell the Russians secrets about Britain's nuclear arsenal, according to diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks.

The United States told Russia that it would hand over the serial numbers of the Trident missiles it supplies Britain, one of America's closest allies.

The serial numbers would give Russia a good handle on just how many missiles are in the hands of Britain, which has long refused to give any details of its nuclear-weapons program, according to The Telegraph newspaper.

NYPost

quote:
Now, however, recently released U.S. diplomatic cables claim that the Obama Administration agreed to give Russia the serial numbers for every Trident Missile it gave the U.K. as part its negotiations over the New START treaty.

While the U.S. Department of State officially denies this was part of the final nuclear arsenal reduction agreement with Russia that went into effect Saturday, some Englishmen are saying the revelation leaves them feeling forsaken by President Obama.

The British Daily Telegraph newspaper said that and other revelations from WikiLeaks' leaked U.S. diplomatic cables make the "Special Relationship" between America and England seem like "a one-sided affair."

CBS
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
quote:
Here are some actual reports:
Which don't contradict the facts in any way. We're not handing over British deployment information, just the same sales information that we were sharing as terms of the previous treaty.
 
Posted by JWatts (Member # 6523) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Here are some actual reports:
Which don't contradict the facts in any way. We're not handing over British deployment information, just the same sales information that we were sharing as terms of the previous treaty.
[Big Grin] You have the most charming positive spin on anything the Obama administration does or says. [Razz] The UK says No we'd like that information confidential, but the Administration says despite the fact that the US has never given the Russians this info in the past, it's clearly part of the Start Treaty. [Roll Eyes] I guess the last 3 administrations just overlooked this part of the treaty over the last 20 years.

quote:
"Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles," the Telegraph reports. "The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain."

 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
How is a serial number "performance data"? You're actively confusing two completely different categories of information. We haven't told them a thing about any UK missile telemetry, only made sure to account for what we've done with our missiles, which is one of the fundamental points of the treaty.
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
For reference, here's the same clause from the 1991 START treaty:

quote:

Each Party shall provide to the other Party, pursuant to subparagraph 3(a) of Article VIII of the Treaty, the following notifications concerning data with respect to items subject to the limitations provided for in the Treaty, according to categories of data contained in the Memorandum of Understanding and other agreed categories of data:

[...]

(8) notification, no later than 48 hours after it has been completed, of the transfer of items to or from a third State in accordance with a pattern of cooperation existing at the time of signature of the Treaty referred to in Article XVI of the Treaty and the First Agreed Statement in the Annex to the Treaty on Agreed Statements. Such notification shall include: the number and type of items transferred; the date of transfer; and the location of transfer;

The only tweak is that this time they'd added "unique identifier" (aka: serial number) to the language. That doesn't give any information of any use in context (it's only meaningful if they find the missiles lying around somewhere and want to track them or if they happen to get a good look at it while it's flying at them)

And we had this discussion just two weeks ago. The facts haven't changed; this is just a continuation of the '91 agreement.

[ February 18, 2011, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]
 
Posted by Greg Davidson (Member # 3377) on :
 
We need a new word to describe the pleasure that some people get in wallowing in propaganda. Where does all this hatred inside you come from?
 
Posted by vegimo (Member # 6023) on :
 
It probably comes from, in part, deflection of snarkasm and condensescension.
 
Posted by JWatts (Member # 6523) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
The only tweak is that this time they'd added "unique identifier" (aka: serial number) to the language. That doesn't give any information of any use in context (it's only meaningful if they find the missiles lying around somewhere and want to track them or if they happen to get a good look at it while it's flying at them)

By your own admission it's different. The British objected to this but the Obama Administration went ahead and did it anyway. It doesn't matter if you don't think it's important. It matters what the owners of the missiles thought. Furthermore, these weren't new missiles the US was selling to the UK, these were missiles that the UK had shipped to the US for refit and refurbishment and were then sent back.

I think it's perfectly fair to specify to the Russians the type and number. That ensures that we're not cheating on the number of missiles by shipping off additional missiles to the UK. But there was no legitimate reason to tweak the treaty this way against the UK's wishes.

[ February 18, 2011, 04:27 PM: Message edited by: JWatts ]
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
quote:
The British objected to this
The never objected to this. They objected to telemetry information. Serial numbers are not telemetry.
 
Posted by Athelstan (Member # 2566) on :
 
Whether it’s technically correct I don’t know but it does seem bad form but then it has been the sceptical relationship for a few years now.

To be honest I didn’t know Russia worried about us in the UK and I think we’re kind of flattered, certainly when we can’t afford Trident anyway. Putin is hardly likely to target London and ruin the assets of Football Club owning Roman Abramovich and Mikhail Prohorov, not when he wants their help to stage the World Cup.

Apparently President Obama is coming to stay at Buckingham Palace, he’s not looking for his birth certificate is he.
 
Posted by Star Pilot 111 (Member # 1972) on :
 
I listened to the link [LOL]

Who is that guy, and how did he become an idiot?

Isn't he the staw man from the Wizard of Oz?
You know, the one without a brain.

It amazes me how, many times, when someone critisizes Obama they find a way to bring up the Nazis.

Also,
I'm tired of Reagan getting all the credit for the wall coming down. It was already in the process of happening, because of humanitarian groups, religious groups, and the East German people who were working behind the scenes. Reagan's handlers, writers directors and producers just photo op'd him when it was best for his image. His publisist's have done a great job for him, and they keep the bad things out of the press. Because, we never hear that during his administrations (Cal Gov and US Pres) the homeless population grew unbelievably more than any time in history, because of his economic policies.
 
Posted by Greg Davidson (Member # 3377) on :
 
Don't forget the role of American Labor Unions in providing material support to Solidarity, the Polish Union, in 1981
 


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1