Obama, on behalf of Russia, suckers Congress into START TREATY. America will unilaterally disarm, and Russia won't. Russia could cite Obama illegal President over Birther issue, beyond quoting Treaty Article 3.6a, and be correct in doing so.

[Updated 12/25/2010...adding specific Treaty language in Article III where 1 bomber = 1 nuclear warhead in this Treaty's US unilateral down-sizing, etc.]
.
.
This is what happens when we have a non-Constitutional individual occupying the US Presidency.  A plan is concococted to emasculate the US Military of its nuclear offensive/defensive arsenal, and is successfully passed, laying the groundwork for an eventual un-MAD (a non-Mutual Assured Destruction) nuclear First Strike against the United States. 


What will happen is that the majority of America's Strategic Defense wil be moved to nuclear submarines. In 1991, then President George Bush Sr. removed our strategic Air Command Bomber capability, and stood down the nuclear defense of the air, where we always had at least several bombers at any one time in the air with nuclear deterrents.   In the 1996, then President Bill Clinton signed a directive that only the President can authorize a nuclear submarine launch.  This is public knowledge, made so in the end statement of a G. Hackman and D. Washington fictional movie about a US Nuclear Sub and the ensuing mutiny to stop a nuclear launch on Russia by that sub.  It was called Crimson Tide. 

The Presidential Decision Directive 60 (PDD-60) signed by Bill Clinton 

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997_11-12/focnov

goes beyond the stating that the US would not use nukes against non-nukes states, or would not allow a nuke launch until after a nuclear attack has been verified.  The power to hold the codes is in the hands of the President.  If the bombs are falling, and the President is inclined to kick back, put his feet up on the desk and wait it out, and the officer holding the Launch Codes decides to leave the room, the Secret Service can execute that officer for Treason, even though the alleged President by apathy is the one doing so as the nukes are going off.  Until the advent of Obama, such a scenario was utterly inconceivable by a President...but with the usurpation of  the America-hating Obama, that very scenario could indeed become a reality. 

Possible Real Nightmare Scenario Implication Projected
In the Obama Administration, that means the launch codes and authorization would not have to legally be decided upon being released to our land silos, nuclear storage facilities, and nuclear subs UNTIL the nukes are popping off on various US Cities, based on a prior Administration's Presidential Directive, and could merely use the ACLUese EXCUSE that the incoming missiles, regardless if it is a few to hundreds of them, "well they might be just merely be conventional warheads, and go land in the middle of nowhere and just make gopher holes in the deserts, fields, or woods somewhere".  That allged legal restriction is already  known by America's enemies, and it is why Venezuela will allow itself to be be a First Strike launch pad, in which its allies Iran and Russia as co-cooperatives will build an arsenal there, and help Venezuela to have a First Strike capability from the south to knock out key defense targets, so as to allow ICBM strikes from the other side of the planet in the same hour.  Instead of destroying nukes as per the Start Treaty signed by Obama, Russia may simply choose to nuclearize Venezuela in the same way they did Cuba in 1961.  An arsenal of 60 tactical nuclear missiles, manned by Russian Teams and Russian "advisors" (security forces) could conceivably be sitting in the jungles of Venezuela by mid 2012 - January 2013 if they have a mind to.

The OBAMA Start Treaty...Famous last words or "Who wrote this Treaty, a dope smoker?":


http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/140035.pdf


p. 1  reads:

Committed to … the achievement of the historic goal of freeing humanity from the nuclear threat….

Guided by the principle of indivisible security….



p. 2 reads:

 Taking into account the positive effect on the world  situation of the significant, verifiable reduction in nuclear arsenals at the turn of the 21st century….


Deeply appreciating the contribution of the Republic of  Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and Ukraine to nuclear  disarmament and to strengthening international peace and security….


p.3 reads:

Article I


1. Each Party shall reduce and limit its strategic offensive arms in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty and shall carry out the other obligations set forth in this Treaty and its Protocol.



2. Definitions of terms used in this Treaty and its Protocol are provided in Part One of the Protocol.


Article II


1. Each Party shall reduce and limit its ICBMs and ICBM  launchers, SLBMs and SLBM launchers, heavy bombers, ICBM  warheads, SLBM warheads, and heavy bomber nuclear armaments,
so that seven years after entry into force of this Treaty and thereafter, the aggregate numbers, as counted in accordance  with Article I11 of this Treaty, do not exceed:
(a) 700, for deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed
heavy bombers;
(b) 1550, for warheads on deployed ICBMs, warheads on
deployed SLBMs, and nuclear warheads counted for deployed
heavy bombers;
(c) 800, for deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers,
deployed and non-deployed SLBM launchers, and deployed and
non-deployed heavy bombers.

P. 4

Article I11



1. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(a) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) Each deployed ICBM shall be counted as one.


(b) Each deployed SLBM shall be counted as one.


(c) Each deployed heavy bomber shall be counted as one.


2. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(b) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) For ICBMs and SLBMs, the number of warheads shall be the number of reentry vehicles emplaced on deployed ICBMs and on deployed SLBMs.


(b) One nuclear warhead shall be counted for each deployed heavy bomber.


3. For the purposes of counting toward the aggregate limit provided for in subparagraph l(c) of Article I1 of this Treaty:


(a) Each deployed launcher of ICBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification, based on 2b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].


(b) Each non-deployed launcher of ICBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification based on 2b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].



(c) Each deployed launcher of SLBMs shall be counted as one.  [the language without specific clarification based on 2 b above, infers as one nuclear warhead].



(d) Each non-deployed launcher of SLBMs shall be counted as one. [the language without specific clarification,  infers as one nuclear warhead].




p. 6

referring to Article III, reads:

6. ICBMs, SLBMs, ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy


bombers shall cease to be subject to this Treaty in accordance


with Parts Three and Four of the Protocol to this Treaty.


ICBMs or SLBMs of an existing type shall cease to be subject


to this Treaty if all ICBM or SLBM launchers of a type


intended for such ICBMs or SLBMs have been eliminated or


converted in accordance with Part Three of the Protocol to


this Treaty.

Pay attention to the underlined sentence, because that is all the Russians need to abide by, and nothing else.  It is a Primary "escape clause".  You disarm, and we have no obligations but to monitor your unilateral disarmament.  (Escape Clause 2 is Obama is NOT a US Natural Born Citizen, therefore cannot legally sign a Treaty passed by a Congress and 3/4ths of the States, etc., but why should they challenge a nation wanting to castrate itself?)

In other words, the Russians are given a free hand to interpret this as NOT being subject to limit the “ICBMs, SLBMs, ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy Bombers” that were earlier being counted by the Treaty, in order to reduce the US to a combined number of 700 + 100 deployable missiles and delivery systems with a max number of 750 warheads, because the delivery systems themselves (even WITHOUT nuclear warheads) are counted as if they were nuclear warheads by the language of this treaty.

 In other words, one nuclear sub and 8 missiles with 3 war heads each counts as 41 under the Treaty: the 8 launchers themselves count as if  8 under launchers and part of the 1550 warheads, and the missile themselves count as 8 of the 700 and are subtracted away from the 1550 allowable warheads as well…these are part of the  8 launchers and their 8 missiles take away from 700 number and leave 684 available; now add the sub as 1, that is part of the 800 number, and you have 683 left for the combined missiles, launchers, and deploying unit.   Above that 800 number we have 750 warheads to actually deploy, which in the case of one nuke sub of 8 missiles with 3 warheads each, is 24. Take 24 from 750, and you have 726 left by which you might defend the United States with.  So instead of reading 1550 warheads, the Obama Administration will enforce a view of  one US Nuclear sub with 8 missiles and 24 warheads as actually equaling 41. 

 Again,  this Treaty emasculates the US nuclear arsenal down UNILATERALLY, while the Russians keep theirs, and if they wish, they might destroy a few non-operable launchers and moth-balled long range bombers. The Treaty by the language of Article 3.6 does not even obligate them to do THAT much.

May I ask, was this very poorly written or intentionally anti-American subterfuge actually part of Obama’s infamous Nuke paper he allegedly wrote when he was allegedly attending (although it has never been proven) Columbia University?

Our only hope now, is that there will be a rejection by more than 13 States, so that this Treaty that signs America's nuclear annihilation from its emnemies as a Top-down Inside-out betrayal, is thwarted and exposed for the Suicide Pact that it is.

That's my input.