PDA

View Full Version : Acclaim & Applause 4 President's Huge Acheivement



Gayle in MD
04-11-2010, 10:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Robert ScheerVeteran Journalist and Editor of Truthdig.com
Posted: April 7, 2010 04:13 AM
<span style='font-size: 26pt'>
At last, a believable sighting of that peace president many of us thought we had elected. Give Barack Obama credit, big time, for the startling progress he has made in tempering the threat of nuclear annihilation.</span>
The Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review Report for the first time prohibits "first use" of nuclear weapons against nations complying with the nonproliferation treaty. It also pledges a halt to U.S. efforts to modernize such weapons, as had been proposed by then-President George W. Bush in his call for new nuclear "bunker busters."

Whereas his predecessor succeeded only in eliminating the nonexistent Iraqi nukes, this president has forged a treaty with the Russians that will reduce the world's supply of the devil's weapons by one-third. But it was essential to follow that up with a clear departure from the always-insane policy that the U.S. has a right to develop and use such weapons as conventional tools of war.

That is the right that Harry Truman acted on in perpetrating the most atrocious act of terrorism in world history when he annihilated the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is what spawned the nuclear arms race that so troubles us today, especially regarding North Korea and Iran.

Yet until Tuesday no American president had renounced the immoral claim that our nation had some God-granted right to use those weapons again. While we consistently insisted it was morally repugnant for any other state to follow in our footsteps, we continued to build ever deadlier versions of these intrinsically heinous weapons.

But that madness ended when Obama on Tuesday affirmed an all-important distinction that Bush, more than any other president, had insisted on blurring--the distinction between nuclear and all other weapons, including the chemical and biological varieties. Lumping them together as weapons of mass destruction denies the global life-ending threat that nukes alone present.

Ironically, the most important section of Obama's strategy statement, instantly attacked by his knee-jerk critics, could help fulfill the penultimate goal of Ronald Reagan. Because of Obama's declaration that the "United States will not develop new nuclear warheads ... or provide for new [nuclear] military capabilities" there is now a plausible case to be made for anti-missile defense. Reagan always insisted that his Strategic Defense Initiative program was a means toward nuclear arms cuts and ultimately the abolition of these horrific implements of mass death. But SDI could be properly criticized as a cover for aggression unless we cut the arsenals as opposed to refining and expanding them.

In his historic meeting with then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Reagan embraced the goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons--just as Obama did in his April 2009 speech in Prague. It is a position that commends itself to all who honestly confront the threat these weapons pose to human existence. We have indulged the luxury of not confronting that ultimate horror because of the time that has passed since the explosion of those now relatively small nuclear bombs over Japan. As Henry Kissinger puts it in the documentary "Nuclear Tipping Point," which was screened at the White House on Tuesday night: "Once nuclear weapons are used, we will be driven to take global measures to prevent it. Why don't we do it now?"

The answer is that we have become inured to the danger and lulled into accepting these weapons as usable implements of war, an attitude reflected in Tuesday's reaction by Arizona Republican Sens. Jon Kyle and John McCain, who in a joint statement denounced Obama's policy as limiting the nuclear "option." They repeated the old canard that nuclear weapons are a legitimate choice in response to a non-nuclear threat.

That will be the line of those who oppose the Senate's ratification of the new START agreement with Russia and the long-overdue passage of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. If they win in that debate there is no serious possibility of progress in preventing the further proliferation of nuclear weapons and breaking the death wish of those who still toy with the idea that such weapons are legitimate. Those in the peace movement who think Obama should have gone further in his efforts to put the nuke genie back in the bottle should tread carefully here. Instead of demanding perfection, they should be gratified that we finally have a president who has at least laid down some important markers of progress.

After decades of both Republican and Democratic administrations indulging the absurdity that "nuclear war fighting" could have a humane outcome, Obama has reversed course. It took 150 meetings, including 30 at the White House, and the president's frequent direct intervention. The outcome is a bold statement of nuclear sanity, and for that President Obama should be applauded.

</div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hans BlixUN arms inspector for Iraq from 2000 to 2003
Posted: April 5, 2010 01:33 PM

STOCKHOLM -- The financial crisis and global warming have had the world's attention in recent years. Thanks to President Barack Obama's initiative, perhaps the season for nuclear disarmament has finally arrived.

On April 8, President Obama is scheduled to meet Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Prague to sign a nuclear arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia that will reduce their arsenals by 30 percent.

The new U.S.-Russian treaty will be received positively. There will be praise for the Obama administration's attitude to arms control and disarmament and for Russia's readiness to join hands with the U.S.

However, welcome as it is and as a significant signal of future cooperation, the new treaty is a relatively modest disarmament measure.

Though not achieving the drastic cuts in nuclear arsenals and delivery vehicles that the world is longing for, the U.S.-Russian treaty is important and encouraging.

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>Coming after Bush administration policies that nearly sent the two states into a new Cold War, the new treaty constitutes the resetting of an important button. It preserves arrangements for confidence-building mutual inspections and sets the stage for negotiating more far-reaching cuts.</span>
We should be aware, however, that a next step of deeper reductions will hardly be attainable unless there is agreement on extensive cooperation on missile defense. Russia is deeply suspicious that the missile shield could enable the U.S. to launch an attack on any target in Russia while itself remaining immune to any such attacks. Further bilateral disarmament will also be impeded if Russia feels that the NATO alliance seeks to encircle it by expanding its military cooperation through membership or otherwise with more states neighboring Russia.

The April 8 signing will take place one year after President Obama's presentation in Prague of a detailed program for the revival of global nuclear arms control and disarmament. Later in April, he will be the host in Washington of a large summit meeting that will focus on nuclear security. In May, the operation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty will be the subject of review at a conference in New York in which nearly all governments in the world will take part. The review that took place in 2005 ended in acrimony and some predicted the end of the treaty. How will it turn out in May?

Through adherence to the NPT that was concluded in 1970, states have committed themselves to stay away from nuclear weapons or to move away from these weapons. If all states had joined and fulfilled their commitments, the treaty would have led by now to a world free of nuclear weapons. They have evidently not done so. The number of nuclear weapons peaked at more than 50,000 during the Cold War, and it is still over 20,000 -- most of them in the U.S. and Russia. The number of states with nuclear weapons has gone from five to nine since 1970.

There is also frustration at the lack of progress on many important items relevant to the treaty. For instance, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has not entered into force because the U.S., China and a number of other states have not ratified it. The negotiation of a convention prohibiting the production of enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons remains blocked at the Geneva Disarmament Conference. The Additional Protocol of the IAEA for strengthened safeguards inspections remains unratified by a large number of states, including Iran.

Some items are bound to attract much attention in May. One is that 20 years after the end of the Cold War, the obligation of five nuclear weapon states parties under article VI of the NPT to negotiate toward nuclear disarmament has not led us anywhere near zero. Another grievance -- especially among Arab states -- is that Israel has refrained from adhering to the treaty and acquired nuclear weapons. A third is that the treaty was violated by several states. Although Iraq and Libya have been brought into compliance, North Korea has not and Iran and perhaps others might aim at ignoring the treaty.

As everyone knows, views on Iran's program for the enrichment of uranium have long been divided and they are likely to remain divided at the NPT conference.

There are many reasons for suspecting that the aim of Iran's enrichment program is the development of a nuclear weapon in breach of NPT obligations or, at least, to move close to the ability to make a weapon. This has already resulted in a dangerous increase of tension in the region.

Why has it not been possible so far to persuade Iran to abandon or suspend the enrichment program? While there is a right under the NPT for parties to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, there is certainly no obligation to use this right.

It is hard to avoid the impression that the approach to Iran has often been high-handed and clumsy. Iran has been told that negotiations about a variety of benefits would be open but only on the condition that the enrichment program first be suspended. Who gives up a trump card before the game? President Obama has had the good sense of authorizing direct talks without any precondition. These talks are now stuck but should be resumed.

States developing nuclear weapons have mostly done so for perceived security reasons and for status. When Iran allegedly began its enrichment program in the 1980s, it might have rightly perceived Iraq as a future nuclear threat. With that threat gone, how wise has it been for the U.S. and Israel to float the idea of bombing Iran's enrichment facilities?

Would it not be wiser to offer diplomatic relations and guarantees against armed attacks/subversion as a part of a nuclear deal? This was done in the case of North Korea. Why not in the case of Iran?

The NPT review conference will hardly enter into these questions, but it will probably discuss how the concept of a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction can be taken up for consideration. Such a zone could well be designed so as to facilitate ventures to use nuclear power for electricity generation or desalination of water, perhaps even on a regional basis.

However, to reduce tensions in the region, the concept needs to exclude from the whole zone not only nuclear weapons but also plants for the enrichment of uranium and reprocessing of plutonium.

In the last few years, the appeals have intensified for government policies aiming, as the NPT does, to free the world from nuclear weapons. In January 2007, former U.S. Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry and former Sen. Sam Nunn published an article in which they reminded the U.S. and the world that the Cold War was over. They argued that if the U.S., Russia and others continued to see nuclear weapons as necessary for their security, others would see the same thing and proliferation would result. They urged that the U.S. and Russia should take the lead in a long process that would eventually result in a nuclear weapon free world.

Their plea has had a broad and strong response in the world. While focusing on many near-term measures, such as the current deal, Obama and Medvedev jointly espoused the long-term aim of full disarmament in a declaration in London in April 2009.

Is this long-term aim naive and utopian? Not necessarily. Between 1910 and 1945 the world experienced two world wars and a collapsed League of Nations. Much could happen between 2010 and 2045. Interdependence is rapidly accelerating and forcing states to show regard for each other's security interests. For the moment, however, there is only a hopeful start on a long journey.

Hans Blix headed the International Atomic Energy Agency from 1981 to 1997 and was the chief UN arms inspector for Iraq from 2000 to 2003. Since 2003, Blix has headed the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission and heads the advisory board on the nuclear program of the United Arab Emirates.

This post was crossposted with permission from the GLOBAL VIEWPOINT NETWORK.

</div></div>

ugotda7
04-11-2010, 11:08 AM
A Liberal Guide to Debating Conservatives
Mar 31, 2010 Author Scot Cerullo

Liberals have long since learned that debating Conservatives can be a challenging endeavor, since Conservatives have a penchant for fortifying their arguments with facts, statistics, history and other elements that create convincing and thoughtful arguments.

Not to worry. The following are several tips Liberals can use right away to begin defeating Conservatives in every debate, every time.

Lib Tip # 1: Drop the Race Card: The moment your Conservative opponent begins crafting a cogent, air-tight argument buttressed in fact, drop the race card. This technique is designed to stifle further discussion, impugns your opponent and puts him on the defensive. Often, this is enough of a distraction to direct attention away from your lack of qualitative, quantitative evidence.

Lib Tip # 2: Impugn the Source: When debating a Conservative, content is less important than character. When your Conservative opponent states a compelling argument, do not address the argument and instead attack the Conservative personally. Since we are all sinners, it shouldn’t take long to find something wrong with your opponent. Use it.

Lib Tip # 3: Social Justice Trumps Logic: Argue every issue from a “Social Justice” or “Moral” high-ground. The Conservative will attempt to show that your ideas are unworkable, unsustainable or downright illogical. Don’t worry about any of that. Just stay on message by arguing from the moral, social justice perspective.

Lib Tip # 4: Exploit the Weakest Link: Define your opponent by his weakest link. If 10,000 Tea Partiers hold a rally, and one guy has a placard that is inappropriate, that is all you need to characterize the entire group as radical, racist militants. See how that works? It’s simple and fun and, most importantly, deflects all those awkward facts and articulate points away from the discussion and leaves the Conservative in a defensive mode.

Lib Tip # 5: Use “New Speak”: If health care is not a right according to the Constitution, and you want it to be a right, claim it is and then raise your voice. Raising your voice is always the best course of action in lieu of a good argument. Redefine words to suit your needs, and always be on guard for any stray, powerful fact or statistic the Conservative may use to support their position.

Lib Tip # 6: State the Opposite of what you believe: If you are in favor of taking money from producers and giving it to non-producers, that’s fine, but make sure your wording is a bit more obtuse than that. Try saying you are in favor of moral and social justice, and characterize everyone who earns a good living as somehow having won the lottery in life, and all those who want as being desperately hard-working folks who have an almost allergic reaction to hand-outs. Never imply or point out in any way that people can change their situation simply by making better decisions.

Lib Tip # 7: Define America by it’s Errors, not its Successes: Taking a cue from Lib Tip # 4, it is important to characterize America by it’s errors in judgement and misdeeds. It is critical that you completely overlook the good things America has done, and the manner in which it has beaten back one dictatorship after another. In fact, you must go to some lengths to divert people from the notion that without America, the world would be a far more dangerous, hostile, sad place. So talk about Indians and Slaves.

Lib Tip # 8: Blame talk radio and FOX news for fanning hate and racism: Avoid at all costs the fact that both talk radio and FOX news stand in defiant refutation of an otherwise fully agreeable media that presents only one template, a liberal template. Also, attempt to divert attention should someone ask why Conservative Talk Radio and FOX news is growing exponentially, while traditional, liberal media is closing offices, thinning their employees and running deficits like, you know, the government.

Lib Tip # 9: Government is Good: Insist that a massive expansion of government is a good thing. Assert that it is our patriotic duty to pay ever more in taxes so that a centralized government comprised of east and west coast Liberal elites can decide what is best for the unwashed masses, since it would be sheer lunacy to allow individuals the right to make decisions for themselves. If you run into problems, see Tips 1-8.

Lib Tip # 10: Assign Blame away from Yourself: Always assign blame to the other guy, preferably a Conservative. This may require rewriting history so that people may one day believe that Reagan did NOT usher in 25 years of prosperity, or it may require still more retooling of the content of public school text books. But over time we’ll get there.

Remember: The ends justify the means. No matter how cruel and violating the means may be, if it results in a mediocre society where all citizens ultimately suck off the the government for their most meager needs, it will all be worthwhile.

There is of course the small matter of where all the money for all these programs will come from. Right now, they come from spirited entrepreneurs, dreamers with drive and other people whose passion poses a direct threat to the new world we want to usher in.

But first things first. Learn the ten tips to squelch free speech, hurt your opponent with the intellectual equivelant of a kick to the groin and avoid facts, statistics and studies altogether, as those will get you in trouble.

Good luck Liberals! Battle on and remember what Dennis Prager said: The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen. Oh wait, no. You don’t want to remember that. My bad. Here, try this: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Yeah, that’s the one. Whew!

pooltchr
04-11-2010, 03:11 PM
Poor Gayle! You will be cheering Obama as he leads the entire country down the road to ruin, and not even know why you are doing it, other than because they told you that you should.

Steve

llotter
04-11-2010, 05:49 PM
Yes Steve, poor Gayle. That shrinking cadre of leftist lie to each other within their fake world and reinforce their fake joy as reality crumbles all around. It is the ultimate case study on man's inhumanity to man, replacing the famous Nazi studies in the annals of science.

Sev
04-11-2010, 06:10 PM
Nothing will come of this until 2011.
By that time both the house and senate will no longer be in control of the libs.

Funny nobody is worried by the Chinese.

A standing army of over 200,000,000 and gaining more economic power by the day.

cushioncrawler
04-11-2010, 06:46 PM
Sev -- China will soon own the republikan party.
madMac.

Stretch
04-11-2010, 07:00 PM
Here we go, back to the old fear mongering again when nothing else will do. America is on the road to ruin! Worse than Nazi Germany's inhumanity to man! And who's worried about China! OMG!!

Sounds like i'd better stock up the emergency rashions and hole up in the bomb shelter. Then make sure i have plenty of amo to shoot starving dems who all got cought with nothing because they thought everything was peachy keen. Well they aint gettin my food!!! Boom boom ratta-tat-tat!!!

Unless of course everyone comes to thier senses and votes Republican then together we will rule the world!!

Yawn.........St.

LWW
04-11-2010, 11:29 PM
Might I suggest you familiarize yourself with spell check and/or a dictionary whilst you are down there?

LWW

Stretch
04-11-2010, 11:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Might I suggest you familiarize yourself with spell check and/or a dictionary whilst you are down there?

LWW </div></div>

Oh no! It's the spelling police! Are you going to write me a ticket? report me to PC central? If not F U!.....look it up. St.

LWW
04-12-2010, 06:17 AM
Perhaps I might suggest "HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE" as a future endeavor for you.

LWW

Stretch
04-12-2010, 07:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps I might suggest "HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE" as a future endeavor for you.

LWW </div></div>

Thanks but i have lots of good friends and my influence reaches far beyond your illuminated screened universe. Jealousy will get you knowhere. St.

LWW
04-12-2010, 07:30 AM
Having a vivid imagination such as yours is probably a blessing to you, all things considered.

LWW

Stretch
04-12-2010, 08:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Having a vivid imagination such as yours is probably a blessing to you, all things considered.

LWW </div></div>

....and you having anything at all is a miracle in itself. St.

LWW
04-12-2010, 08:17 AM
I think you need to wipe the spittle off of your screen.

LWW

Gayle in MD
04-12-2010, 08:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here we go, back to the old fear mongering again when nothing else will do. America is on the road to ruin! Worse than Nazi Germany's inhumanity to man! And who's worried about China! OMG!!

Sounds like i'd better stock up the emergency rashions and hole up in the bomb shelter. Then make sure i have plenty of amo to shoot starving dems who all got cought with nothing because they thought everything was peachy keen. Well they aint gettin my food!!! Boom boom ratta-tat-tat!!!

Unless of course everyone comes to thier senses and votes Republican then together we will rule the world!!

Yawn.........St. </div></div>

If they're so deep in denial that they're still refusing to accept the fact that Bush, Cheney, et al, lied us into a war by exploiting our national grief after 9/11, and set this country up for numerous no win situations in the process, which in turn, devastated our economy, then how the hell can we expect them to acknowledge the fact that this President has already accomplished things that other presidents only dream about achieving.

Denial and lies accompanied by fear mongering, is exactly what Americans voted against in the last election.

This agreement from Russia was a great step forward in nuclear non proliferation. It just frosts their partisan A$$es everytime President Obama shows up the last administration for being the incompetent Klutzes they really were.

Bah bah bah, said the Bubba.

G.

Gayle in MD
04-12-2010, 08:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps I might suggest "HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE" as a future endeavor for you.

LWW </div></div>

Thanks but i have lots of good friends and my influence reaches far beyond your illuminated screened universe. Jealousy will get you knowhere. St. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps I might suggest "HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE" as a future endeavor for you.

LWW </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">BWA HA HA HA...OMG, that's got to be the funniest sentence ever written on this forum!

Dear Stretch, we can't expect a partisan troll, cyberstalker, with delusions of granduer to engage in an intellectual debate!

Your intelligence and vast common sense is beyond his grasp. It's a Bubba thing.... they always pull out the dictionary when their fear mongering absurdities fail....

Is our children learning????</span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

LWW
04-12-2010, 08:35 AM
http://afrocityblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/bush_derangement_syndrome-s.jpg

LWW

Stretch
04-12-2010, 10:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think you need to wipe the spittle off of your screen.

LWW </div></div>

LMFAO! You realy are retarded. Now your seeing things. Just when i thought you were lower than doggie-do you found a way to dig deeper. amazing! St.

LWW
04-12-2010, 11:36 AM
Thanks for confirming that you simply cannot discuss things without spewing hate and personal attacks.

But ... I already knew that.

LWW

Stretch
04-13-2010, 04:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for confirming that you simply cannot discuss things without spewing hate and personal attacks.

But ... I already knew that.

LWW </div></div>

Ah, but your not interested in "discussing" anything are you? That's the big lie. You attack, ridicule, discount, twist, and harrass. Nothing in your 5000 plus posting spasm is anywhere near what most sane people could call a "discussion". No, it's all about you and your mighty word spoken from on high as "the truth". LMFAO The real reason you came over here is probably that outside your hapless band of rejects and wierdos knowone over on azb would even give you the time of day. A crushing blow to your ego no doubt so hense your invasion here for a new audience. St.