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 would simply yield myself 30 seconds to say that this is a debate that takes us beyond rhetoric, and I think to use the term rhetoric is not advisable in the context of this debate. We are talking about life and death here, and to demean…
This has not been a debate. This is a very complex issue. It takes some time to lay the basis of the foundation of the arguments on either side. But once we spend enough time laying down the basis of our respective positions, allowing us…
There is considerable concern, I would like to say to my distinguished colleague from Colorado, at both the local level and the Federal level, that the environmental cleanup proposed by the Department of the Army for the Presidio in San…
I would suggest that, Mr. Chairman, when one argues that our national defense is the most important or the only responsibility of the Federal Government, I would challenge that assertion. My reading of the Preamble to the Constitution is…





