| News

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Deal or no deal': No New START

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Tuesday, Dec. 21, 2010

Harry Reid sure has a warped sense of Christmas gifts.

If the Democrat Senate majority leader gets his way today, the upper chamber will vote to end debate on the abomination known as New START -- a successor nuclear arms treaty with Russia -- and then, likely on Thursday, vote to saddle the United States with a hand-tying, national-security-threatening "deal."

It's this simple, as stated by Reagan administration Defense official Richard Perle and Heritage Foundation defense scholar Kim Holmes: "(A)rms-control treaties should serve our security interests now and in the longer term. New START does neither."

The proposed treaty is antithetical to U.S. security. Messrs. Perle and Holmes, writing in National Review Online, say the treaty would:

• Encumber our freedom to deploy ballistic-missile defense

• Squander the negotiating leverage needed to bring Russian shorter-range missiles under control

• Reduce verification standards in this and perhaps future arms deals.

Thus, New START is not a nuclear arms reduction treaty but an Rx for America's suicide. Harry Reid's gift -- to the Russians -- must not be delivered.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read News