Slashdot Mirror


US, Russia Reach Nuclear Arsenal Agreement

Peace Corps Library writes "The United States and Russia, seeking to move forward on one of the most significant arms control treaties since the end of the cold war, announced that they had reached a preliminary agreement on cutting each country's stockpiles of strategic nuclear weapons, effectively setting the stage for a successor to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (Start), a cold war-era pact that expires in December. Under the framework, negotiators are to be instructed to craft a treaty that would cut strategic warheads for each side to between 1,500 and 1,675, down from the limit of 2,200 slated to take effect in 2012 under the Treaty of Moscow (PDF) signed by President George W. Bush. The limit on delivery vehicles would be cut to between 500 and 1,100 from the 1,600 currently allowed under Start. Perhaps more important than the specific limits would be a revised and extended verification system that otherwise would expire with Start in December. The United States currently has 1,198 land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-based missiles and bombers, which together are capable of delivering 5,576 warheads, according to its most recent Start report in January, while Russia reported that it has 816 delivery vehicles capable of delivering 3,909 warheads. 'We have a mutual interest in protecting both of our populations from the kinds of danger that weapons proliferation is presenting today,' said President Obama."

4 of 413 comments (clear)

  1. Mines bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

    What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

    • Linus Torvalds is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
    • Richard M. Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
    • Alan Cox is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

    I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

    Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail, which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

    As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

    And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

    Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

    'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

    Is this why you were touching your penis in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

    We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering

  2. Afro-American Racism Against Whites and Asians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    During the election, about 95% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin. See the exit-polling data by CNN.

    Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc. These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against Whites (and other non-Black folks). Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is Hispanic or Asian. So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern. Only about 65% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama. In other words, a maximum of 65% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable. (A maximum of 65% for McCain is okay. So, European-American support at 55% for McCain is well below this threshold and, hence, is not racist.)

    If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65% of them would have supported Obama. At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.

    At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals. That claim is an outright lie. Look at the exit-polling data for the Democratic primaries. Consider the case of North Carolina. Again, about 95% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton. Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical. Yet, 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton. Why? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.

    Here is the bottom line. Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America. He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.

    African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100% acceptable. Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior. Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color. Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American. You need not defend your actions in any way. Voting on the basis of skin color is quite acceptable by today's moral standard.

  3. that is not the worst part by Shivetya · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    the worst part is the Congress using the death as a distraction to get some of their less savory items into law

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  4. Re:Robert Strange McNamara 1916 - 2009 by jmorris42 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    > You forgot the part where the crazy probable child molester pushed the
    > coverage of the struggle in Iran off the front pages.......

    Only because they wanted a reason to stop covering Iran anyway. The administration clearly didn't want to be talking about Iran. Because it is becoming increasingly clear that they are on the other side of that issue from where the civilized world is and know it is a losing issue for them.

    Think I'm being extreme by implying we are now part of the Axis of Evil? Well consider the available evidence. Our government supports the Mad Mullahs in Iran. We support Castro, Chavez and Danny Ortega in trying to put a tyrant back in Honduras. We have accepted the Nork's Nuke ambitions as a fait accompli[1] and have all but admitted we can't/won't stop Iran from getting the Bomb. And on today's topic we still deal with Russia as if they were still the Soviet Union... as if they still mattered; when in reality petty Evil is about all they are good for these days. The Russians are going to reduce their nuke stockpiles anyway, they can't afford to maintain their old stockpiles, have few resources to devote to designing new ones, etc.

    It is clear the average Iranian no longer wants to be a part of the Axis of Evil, I'd bet good money the average Nork wishes Kim would frickin' die and they could reunify with the South and get a square meal once in awhile. Cubans vote with their boats even though many die trying to escape. The Hondurans are pretty much unified in their desire to keep their Republic but will almost certainly end up being invaded while we either stand silent or actually help oppress them. So now we join the list of Axis members whose people don't approve of the evil being done in their name but are apparently powerless to change their regime.

    --
    Democrat delenda est