It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should the Democrats promote a Worldwide Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty as their #1 Issue in 2008?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Should the Democrats promote a Worldwide Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty as their #1 Issue in 2008?

Since the war is still a touchy subject, shouldn't the democrats do what the democrats do best, promote peace. Isn't it time for America and the rest of the world hear this message, We need to end nuclear weapons today! And we need everyone to work together to do it.

Wouldn't the gesture be a great message to the world? Would this not be a good issue to bring people together from both parties?

Is this a winning message for the 08 Presidential Elections?




posted on May, 2 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   

posted by Low Orbit: “Should the Democrats promote a Worldwide Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty as their #1 Issue in 2008?


No. Most voters cannot spell “proliferation” and those who can don’t give a darn about it. Did you see any uprising when Geo W “abandoned” the Treaty in New Delhi? It’s a non issue. But one we may well live to regret.


Since the war is still a touchy subject, shouldn't the Democrats do what the Democrats do best, promote peace. Isn't it time for America and the rest of the world hear this message, We need to end nuclear weapons today! And we need everyone to work together to do it. Wouldn't the gesture be a great message to the world? Would this not be a good issue to bring people together from both parties? Is this a winning message for the 08 Presidential Elections? [Edited by Don W]


Now L/O, you’re getting facetious. Gen of the Army MacArthur thought ‘nukes were just one more weapon in the arsenal. Fortunately for the world, Harry Truman fired him. Bad for us, the irresponsivle one is now the president. The good guys are the generals. Role reversal.

Regardless, here's my list
1. Mishandling of the Hurricane Katrina natural disaster
2. Mishandling of the Iraq War.
3. Jack Abramoff scandal and Tom deLay scandal
4. Immigration Policy
5. Adverse effects of globalization
6. Proliferation of nuclear weapons
7. Inadequate health care
8. Inadequate funding of public education
9. Interference in science and health
10. Rape of the environment

[edit on 5/2/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I wasn't trying to mock anyone, I just think that this would be a Great Option to help simmer Global Tension as well as ease the situation in the middle east.

If the democrats could send the message we don't like the approach our country has been taking and we think we can do a better job, and we can do it better and at the same time not be reliant on nukes for a weapons system. I think that is a strong message to the majority of Americans where am I going wrong?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
personally, I think your list looks awful, look how negative it is? Where is the message, where is the vision?

Negative Elections don't work, just because there are always some poitical jabs taken at the other candidate does not by mean that you can make your entire Political Agenda from it.

Where is the substance, where is the backbone?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I thought We Already Had Such A Treaty? The One Geo W "Busted" In New Delhi.


LowOrbit: “I think this would be a Great Option to help simmer Global Tension as well as ease the situation in the Middle East. If the Democrats could send the message we don't like the approach our country has been taking and we think we can do a better job, and we can do it better and at the same time not be reliant on nukes for a weapons system. I think that is a strong message to the majority of Americans where am I going wrong?


1. It is not the foreign voters we need to “simmer.”
2. Kerry said that, “I can do it better.” Dems lost in Ohio by 120,000 votes
3. Not to “rattle” nuclear bombs is sort of elementary in all but the current occupant of the Oval Office. You save that for last. Let him get himself off the dime.


“ . . personally, I think your list looks awful, look how negative it is? Where is the message, where is the vision? Negative Elections don't work, just because there are always some political jabs taken at the other candidate does not by mean that you can make your entire Political Agenda from it. Where is the substance, where is the backbone?


Do you think the Swift Boats were a win for Bush or a win Kerry? This is an “off year” election. It is actually 435 House seats and 34 Senate seats. As the machinations like those in Texas Tom DeLay has produced, the Dems must poll more than 55% of the vote nationwide to win a one seat majority in the House. I think it is suggested only 45-50 seats are close.

The others have been gerrymandered into “safe” districts. Seagate seats are always state-wide, so it will be more of a rerun in Red State versus Blue State thinking. You may sense I do not hold out much hope for the 2006 election. Thins will have to get worse before there can be a sea change.

[edit on 5/2/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
the reason no one believed Kerry would actually do it is because they weren't sure if it was his message or his wifes.

You are correct, there have been Nuke Non-Prolif Treaties in the past and they worked with some success, the democrats should try to get us as a nation back on that path.

It is no wonder you are pessimistic about the current elections. Your party has been pesimistic and bankrupt on ideas for the last 6 years. Just because you can prove your political opponent is a crook doesn't make you by default Gandhi! If your party ever wants to gain control again it better stop pointing fingers and get back to work.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
Should the Democrats promote a Worldwide Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty as their #1 Issue in 2008?

Since the war is still a touchy subject, shouldn't the democrats do what the democrats do best, promote peace.

Like in wwii and vietnam? Or like when they bombeb the balkans and afghanistan and libya??



Isn't it time for America and the rest of the world hear this message, We need to end nuclear weapons today!

And how is this supposed to work? There is already an international agreement whereby participants, such as, lets say, Iran, are given nuclear power technology, to promote cheap energy and peace, in exchange for NEVER making nuke weapons and PERMANENTLY being open to IAEA and other International inspections.

So, what exactly would your proposal accomplish?? What would happen if Iran had signed your treaty a few years ago? How would iran be stopped, considering that its already obliged not to build nuke weapons and give in to inspections, but it has officially responded "we don't give a damn"


????



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 09:38 PM
link   
What would my proposal accomplish, ahh nothing you would be interested in, ridding the world of Nuclear Warheads and attempting to lay the ground work for world peace.


Nyg, the U.S. has Nuked all of these places; "balkans and afghanistan and libya"
What are you attempting to relate it to?


You should know the Republicans have held the Hard Handed approach to international relations the last 50 years where as the democrats come with their olive branch approach.

It's a little fire and ice routine. Since the Republicans will of owned the stage for 8 years come 08 I suggest that the Democrats, if they are so lucky to take the stage, bring to the UN a new Non Proliferation Treaty in which the US will be completely on board with.

If Iran signed the treaty and then we find ourselves in the same situation today I would tend to hope that China and Russia would be more willing to come to our aid, since at that time we would be less of a threat to them and for the world.

How do you think it would play out?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
What would my proposal accomplish, ahh nothing you would be interested in,

Ah, so rather than engage in discussion you'd rather throw charges around. Fair enough. Not really interested in that at the moment, apologies.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   
can't take the jab, Nygdan? I was just testing the waters, I do value your opinion and I would like to hear your response to it, when time allows, and I would like to hear more about your positive strategy for the dems in 08.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join