Author Topic: Wikileaks: Obama agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets. WWTTFF???  (Read 13183 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Andrew Bolt
Sunday, February 06, 2011 at 12:01am

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/obama_slips_russia_details_about_uk_missiles




 
If the significance of the agreement is as reported, Barack Obama is treating Britain with the contempt he’d already signalled:


The US secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week.

Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.

The fact that the Americans used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the so-called “special relationship”, which is shown often to be a one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the WikiLeaks website.

Details of the behind-the-scenes talks are contained in more than 1,400 US embassy cables published to date by the Telegraph, including almost 800 sent from the London Embassy…

Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK’s Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.

Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.

The relevant part of the agreement:



Document of the Russian side

February 9, 2010

Agreed Statement

On the movement of SLBM “Trident-II” missiles, transferred by the US to equip the Navy of Great Britain

The Parties agree that, in order to increase transparency in relation to the use of “Trident-II” SLBMs, transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America shall provide notification to the Russian Federation about the time of such transfer, as well as the unique identifier and the location of each of the transferred missiles. The Parties agree that, upon conclusion of the life cycle of “Trident-II” SLBMs transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America will send notification to the Russian Federation about the time and method of elimination, as well as the unique identifier for each of the transferred missiles.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Document of the Russian side

February 9, 2010

Agreed Statement

On the movement of SLBM “Trident-II” missiles, transferred by the US to equip the Navy of Great Britain

The Parties agree that, in order to increase transparency in relation to the use of “Trident-II” SLBMs, transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America shall provide notification to the Russian Federation about the time of such transfer, as well as the unique identifier and the location of each of the transferred missiles. The Parties agree that, upon conclusion of the life cycle of “Trident-II” SLBMs transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America will send notification to the Russian Federation about the time and method of elimination, as well as the unique identifier for each of the transferred missiles.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
State dept just issued denial of the story. 

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Source: ABC News

Both the U.S. and British governments disputed on Saturday a London Telegraph report asserting that the "U.S. secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty."

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley called the report "nonsense," saying the information sharing about U.S. transfers of nuclear weapons to the U.K. dates back to the original START treaty, an assertion backed up by the White House and British government officials.

-snip-
Crowley emailed ABC News that "Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM's to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START. We simply carried forward and updated this notification procedure to the new treaty. There was no secret agreement and no compromise of the U.K.'s independent nuclear deterrent."

A knowledgeable source with the British government, speaking anonymously because his government has a policy of not commenting on Wikileaks, says his understanding of the policy conforms with that asserted by the State Department.


 :o :o

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Still want to see the cables on this.


blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
"Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM's to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START.


its been going on since 1991, end of story

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Like I said, the story said that the cabals show opposition, so they should reveal the cables and see what the real story is on this.

theonlyone

  • Guest
Has Russia made a single concession over the last 2 years? They continue to coddle the Iranian regime, oppress their own people and pretty much do whatever the fuck they want. I can't think of a single concession this mafiocracy has made since Obama took office.

Obama is the biggest foreign policy disaster I've ever seen.

 So what cha want? Russia is Russia we could care less what you think is right or should be, take care of your own issues. Dostoevsky once has said - not that Russians let the Mongols rule them or something but Russians just liked it, got tired of it and then there are no Mongols...The US foreign politics is alike Mongols, they try stick their nose everywhere just the methods are different, no body rides horse no more... :P

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
"Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM's to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START.


its been going on since 1991, end of story

so you're saying 333 wasted 5 pages calling Obama a: 


Bottom line:   Obama is a traitor, a communist, a radical islamist, a marxist stooge, an anti-american zealot, an anti-colonialist, a dirtbag, a vagabond, a grifter, a thug, a product of affirmative action at its worst, a beneficiary of the trust of guilt ridden gullible white morons, a poverty pimp, a faux african american abusing the racial history of a segment of our population to ganer misplaced loyalty when none is warranted, and overall lying sack of shit willing to throw any ally or friend of the USA under the bus in order for him to pursue his treasonous agenda.   


What about Obam trying to "collapse the nation" ?
I know it sounds crazy but he's still doing that right?
We all know that 333 is not an hysterical lunatic right?

Like I have said fron day 1, its intentional. He's trying to collapse the nation.

As outlandish as that seems, how does one come to any other conclusion based on these daily acts of sabotage against our nation and allies? 

Johnny_Blaze

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Everything is going according to plan - just not for us.
Just Do It

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
Source: ABC News

Both the U.S. and British governments disputed on Saturday a London Telegraph report asserting that the "U.S. secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty."

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley called the report "nonsense," saying the information sharing about U.S. transfers of nuclear weapons to the U.K. dates back to the original START treaty, an assertion backed up by the White House and British government officials.

-snip-
Crowley emailed ABC News that "Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM's to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START. We simply carried forward and updated this notification procedure to the new treaty. There was no secret agreement and no compromise of the U.K.'s independent nuclear deterrent."

A knowledgeable source with the British government, speaking anonymously because his government has a policy of not commenting on Wikileaks, says his understanding of the policy conforms with that asserted by the State Department.


 :o :o

Thank you Blacken....WRONG again 3333...another meaningless tthread that leads no where except to egg on 3333's face AGAIN

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
So whats the deal.. did he give info or not.. im not reading all this shit..

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So whats the deal.. did he give info or not.. im not reading all this shit..

So far, the story said the cables from wikileaks said the UK opposed this and Russia demanded the info as a condition of START.   

So far SOS has denied the story, and the paper has not released the cabes.   

The paper needs to release the cables asap that they claim to quote in the story or issue a retraction.     

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
So far, the story said the cables from wikileaks said the UK opposed this and Russia demanded the info as a condition of START.   

So far SOS has denied the story, and the paper has not released the cabes.   

The paper needs to release the cables asap that they claim to quote in the story or issue a retraction.     

that fuck are you talking about.. Did Obama give info to Russia as you said.. im trying to find it on Fox news.. can you send me a link

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
that fuck are you talking about.. Did Obama give info to Russia as you said.. im trying to find it on Fox news.. can you send me a link


 ::)  ::)

Read the story - they are claiming wikileaks cabals show the russians demanded info on UK Nukes and that the UK objected but obama went forward anyway.   

So far paper has not released the cables they claim to be referring to.   SOS denies the story.   

What is so hard to understand?   

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way

 ::)  ::)

Read the story - they are claiming wikileaks cabals show the russians demanded info on UK Nukes and that the UK objected but obama went forward anyway.   

So far paper has not released the cables they claim to be referring to.   SOS denies the story.   

What is so hard to understand?   

lol.. you are so full of rat shit its comin out of your ears.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
lol.. you are so full of rat shit its comin out of your ears.

Still drunk from yesterday?

Read the damn story for Gods' sake.  it will take a minute.   The story needs to publish the cables they claim to be referring to or issue a retraction.   

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Still drunk from yesterday?

Read the damn story for Gods' sake.  it will take a minute.   The story needs to publish the cables they claim to be referring to or issue a retraction.   

So you werent premature in your posting of this "story"

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So you werent premature in your posting of this "story"


ABC News ran it as did man others, I posted the links.   

So for the SOS denies it, which doesnt mean shit and the newspaper has not relased the exact cables they claim to be referecing.       

whork25

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1653
  • Getbig!
So you werent premature in your posting of this "story"

Well to be fair Obama is 333.. number one enemy. A commie Kenyan sleaper spy, the long lost son of Osama Bin Laden(and you thought there name was a coinsidence lol), intent on destroying the US and creating a Islamic state instead..

So sometimes his rhetoric is a little off but wouldnt you be frustrated if you had this knowledge and the only one who could relate was Glenn Bech and Sarah Palin hmmh..

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Well to be fair Obama is 333.. number one enemy. A commie Kenyan sleaper spy, the long lost son of Osama Bin Laden(and you thought there name was a coinsidence lol), intent on destroying the US and creating a Islamic state instead..

So sometimes his rhetoric is a little off but wouldnt you be frustrated if you had this knowledge and the only one who could relate was Glenn Bech and Sarah Palin hmmh..

So let me get this straight.. 333 only double checks and facts checks when there is something negative about a GOPer.. but if a bum off the street says something about obama, then its the Gods honest truth..//

am i correct

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So let me get this straight.. 333 only double checks and facts checks when there is something negative about a GOPer.. but if a bum off the street says something about obama, then its the Gods honest truth..//

am i correct

ABC News is a bum off the street?   

BTW - can you show me one post EVER kneepaddig the GOP?   

If you want to include Reagan, fine, ill give you that.   

whork25

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1653
  • Getbig!
So let me get this straight.. 333 only double checks and facts checks when there is something negative about a GOPer.. but if a bum off the street says something about obama, then its the Gods honest truth..//

am i correct

Pretty much

There is a few GOP pricks he does not like though but compared to his Obama hate? No comparison

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40063
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Pretty much

There is a few GOP pricks he does not like though but compared to his Obama hate? No comparison


The worst republican right now is still miles better than the best obama.