To establish some reality to people who are listening to this debate, we already have 350 of these missiles. The debate is whether we buy 84 additional ones. I am saying that is the build up to build down. In my proposal we can stay within the anticipated requirements of START II, of the START II negotiation, and what we anticipate in START III, we can do that within the current inventory of 350. Why buy 84 more because we know we are going to come down again? That logic escapes me; the gentleman cannot make me understand that.
Ronald Dellums: “To establish some reality to people who are listening to this debate, we already have 350 of these missiles. The debate…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating the purchase of additional missiles in relation to arms reduction agreements.
Share
More from Ronald Dellums
I just felt compelled to make that observation. I think that disadvantages a number of Members on both sides of the aisle, but that is just my observation, and leadership going to have to make the judgment that they choose to make…
One very quick response to the gentleman is: The logic. Do we build up to build down. To build up we are going to spend billions of dollars and we know we are ultimately going to build down. That is the answer to the gentleman's point…
I believe the gentleman is absolutely correct, he has beefed up these provisions and I think appropriately. I would be more than happy to work with the gentleman in the context of the conference to move it in the direction of the…
I would assert here, very straightforward and very aggressively, that how a Nation chooses to spend its money is a profound statement about a Nation's principles, its values and its priorities. And in that regard I am extremely proud to…





