Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Dec 19th, 2010 :: 2:48:55 to 2:54:30
Total video length: 7 hours 11 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:132 Duration: 0:05:35 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Jon Kyl

2:48:52 to 2:49:12( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: not do -- managed to not do in the last three hours, need to use it. mr. risch: thank you, senator. i'll try not in that regard. well, mr. president, fell year

Jon Kyl

2:48:55 to 2:54:30( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jon Kyl

Jon Kyl

2:49:13 to 2:49:36( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: senators, distinguished chairman and ranking member, i think certainly we've had a civil and a good airing of an issue that is of considerable concern to i think every member of this body. i'm -- i'm a little disappointed in that we started out

Jon Kyl

2:49:37 to 2:49:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: acknowledging that it was a -- a very deep and serious concern to every member of this body as it was to the commission in their report on america's stratigic posture and i felt along the line a little bit the concern was denigrated and i -- i want to back up on that one more time

Jon Kyl

2:49:58 to 2:50:19( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: and say that in my judgment and in the judgment of members of this commission, the issue of tactical weapons exceeds in severity and concern the issue of stratigic weapons. now, i understand one might argue that you're arguing about how many angels can dance on the

Jon Kyl

2:50:20 to 2:50:41( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: head of a pin, as opposed to which -- which really is of the most concern. but i've come back to -- and the reasons i gave as to why i think that the tactical issue is more important than the stratigic issue. and that is on the stratigic

Jon Kyl

2:50:42 to 2:51:04( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: issue, we're in about the same position we were in 40 years ago with the exception, and admittedly an important exception, that the raw fums are down. -- numbers are down. when we started this each party had about 6,000 warheads. as i said, if either party pulled the trigger and launched 6,000 or some significant part

Jon Kyl

2:51:05 to 2:51:25( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: of that, obviously that's -- that's the -- the teeter ens that each -- deterrence that each party was counting on that neither would do that. today we're down to and with all due respect to my good friend from massachusetts, the numbers reported in the press are 1,100 and 2,100 and i understand that there's intelligence information

Jon Kyl

2:51:26 to 2:51:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: that we can't go into here. but in any event most people would agree that we have the advantage in numbers from a stratigic standpoin and, indeed if -- if the numbers are even close to that, the -- whether it's 6,000 warheads or 1,000 warheads, when someone pulls the trigger, the party's

Jon Kyl

2:51:48 to 2:52:09( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: over for this world. and so focusing on the raw numbers when we've got a 40-year history that we aren't going to do that and they're not going to do and most people agree that neither side is inclined to pull the trigger, what are the real concerns? the real concerns with an

Jon Kyl

2:52:10 to 2:52:30( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: accidental launch from them, although remote, possible, but more importantly an intentional launch from a rogue neighbor. one would look at north korea or iran in that regard. and so in my judgment, the two issues that really need to be

Jon Kyl

2:52:31 to 2:52:52( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: focused on are the defensive missle issue and the tactical nuclear weapons issue. now, let me say, i agree with my good friend from massachusetts and senator levin, that geography is such that tactical weapons -- the issue of tactical weapons is substantially more

Jon Kyl

2:52:53 to 2:53:13( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: important on a direct basis to the russians than it is to us. afterall, we have oceans on each side of us to the east and to the west which the russians don't enjoy. they've had a 100-year history of seeing invasions come by land and enter immediately, which we don't have. and so in that regard i will

Jon Kyl

2:53:14 to 2:53:35( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: concede certainly that the tactical issue is important for them. and the good senator from massachusetts makes a good point in that i -- i think they would like to relocate, if they could, their tactical weapons to be focused more on the chinese threat and perhaps more on the

Jon Kyl

2:53:36 to 2:53:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: threat from the south from other countries and we ought to help them out in that regard by entering into negotiations in that regard on the tactical weapons. but i come back to them, the tactical weapons are an important issue. senator levin says they are a concern. senator levin says we shouldn't kill this treaty simply because

Jon Kyl

2:53:58 to 2:54:18( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: of a concern. and i agree with senator levin. i have not from day one said that we ought to kill this treaty. i have said from day one everyone has convinced me and i think virtually everyone else, that we are much better off with the treaty than we are without a

Jon Kyl

2:54:19 to 2:54:32( Edit History Discussion )

Jon Kyl: treaty. and i think everyone has worked in good faith in that regard. but on the other hand having said that, i don't think we should then throw in the towel and say, well, okay, we will

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid