Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

Inhofe: Military Requirements Must Not be Sacrificed While Improving Efficiency

Statement

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) and member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC), today expressed great disappointment after the U.S. Senate ratified New START by vote of 71- 26.

"The Senate failed in its Article 2, Section 2 Constitutional right to make Treaties, rubber stamping the New START treaty during the lame duck session of Congress," said Inhofe. "Republican Senators have attempted to fix this treaty that directly impact our national security through amendments, like my amendment that would have tripled the amount of inspections, only to be defeated by Democrats."

Inhofe continued, "President Obama and the Democratic Party are taking this country down a dangerous path and it appears they are more concerned about what Russia thinks than what is best for America. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated on December 20, that the New START Treaty "cannot be opened up and become the subject of new negotiations' and Senate Democrats followed his direction. I believe new START is just another attempt by President Obama to achieve his unrealistic vision of no nuclear weapons. His efforts to achieve this vision will do nothing but disarm America and leave us vulnerable to threats from places like Iran and North Korea."

Inhofe concluded, "And who would be the first to disarm? Not North Korea, not Iran but good old America. What a terrifying thought."

In a Youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tunYTiLAJrU) on the subject, Inhofe made the following comments:

"How do you achieve this great utopian vision of a world without nuclear weapons? Who will be the first to disarm? North Korea? Iran? No, good ole America.

"Don't forget, a true liberal doesn't think we need a military in the first place. They think all the countries stand in a circle and hold hands and unilaterally disarm all threats will go away. This is scary, you guys. Roger Cohen with the New York Times said it right, "A world without nuclear weapons sounds nice, but of course that was the world that brought us World War I and World War II.' If you like the sound of that, the touchy-feely "Global Zero' bandwagon is probably for you. But, it's not for me. Merry Christmas."

Background Information

Ø New START reduces the U.S. nuclear stockpile without ensuring modernization of the country's nuclear arsenal and supporting infrastructure.
Ø The new treaty contains language limiting U.S. Missile Defense development and deployment
Ø New START lacks verification procedures that would ensure compliance and deter cheating and fails to deter proliferation or address tactical nuclear weapons.
Ø Inhofe's amendment, that was ultimately rejected by the Senate, would have increased accountability on the Russians by tripling the number of inspections required by the treaty
Ø Other Republicans offered various amendments that would have addressed the Russians not deploying sea-launched cruise missiles, the Bilateral Consultative Commission, the return of stolen United States military equipment by the Russians during their attack on Georgia, tactical nuclear weapons not included in this treaty which the Russians have a 10 to 1 advantage over the U.S., and the Russian using U.S. missile defense capabilities as a treaty exit.


Source:
Skip to top
Back to top