Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Dec 22nd, 2010 :: 3:27:05 to 3:48:30
Total video length: 11 hours 3 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:869 Duration: 0:21:25 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Jeff Sessions

3:27:01 to 3:27:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: the public record, in my judgment. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator fr mr. sessions: mr. president, i've given a lot of thought to the treaty and having been involved in missile defense and

Jeff Sessions

3:27:05 to 3:48:30( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jeff Sessions

Jeff Sessions

3:27:22 to 3:27:42( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: nuclear issues, serving on the strategic subcommittee of armed services, being ranking member, being chairman of it. manufacture the provisions -- many of the provisions, indeed, in the treaty are acceptable and should pose no threat to our national security, but considered as part of the administration's stated foreign

Jeff Sessions

3:27:43 to 3:28:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: policy and strategic policies and in relation to the reality of the world situation today, i do not believe the treaty will make us safer. i think that's a good test. i disagree with my colleagues that are overly confident that this is going to make the world safer. i believe the treaty, for that reason, should be rejected.

Jeff Sessions

3:28:04 to 3:28:24( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: some say a defeat for the treaty would harm the united states. i think the entire world would see the senate action as a resurgent -- resurgence of america's historical policy of peace through strength and a rejection of a leftist vision of a world without nuclear weapons. the negotiating posture

Jeff Sessions

3:28:25 to 3:28:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: statements and actions of russia indicate that it is regressing, sadly, into an old soviet mind-set as it views the outside world. this is disappointing and indicative of anything but a positive reset we hope to achieve with them. it's extremely important for russia, the united states

Jeff Sessions

3:28:48 to 3:29:08( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: security and the world security that rush that see its role as a positive force for peace and security. these negotiations, however, show the face of the old soviet union. they've been so relentless in -- in the way they've negotiated.

Jeff Sessions

3:29:09 to 3:29:32( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: negotiation with any mature power, especially russia, are difficult and serious. this administration began, i believe, with a naive expectation that a treaty could be quickly achieved that would show their leadership towards peace and a nuclear-free world. the obama administration wanted to set an example for other nations to reduce their nuclear

Jeff Sessions

3:29:33 to 3:29:53( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: weapons, towards that world without any nuclear weapons. we've heard this leadership and this setting of an example theme repeatedly from the president and the administration. but russia had not the slightest interest in such vague concepts nor in eliminating all nuclear weapons. they have no idea or intention

Jeff Sessions

3:29:54 to 3:30:15( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: ever of relinquishing nuclear weaponsment they were focused on their own national interest, on coming out ahead in the negotiations for military, political, psychological and hegemonic reasons. it seems clear to me that russia got what it wanted and president obama got a treaty paper which

Jeff Sessions

3:30:16 to 3:30:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: strategically means very little. but can be touted as he desired as a victory for peace. so this is what i've concluded during this debate. and the the debate has been helpful. the debate has caused me to think through a good bit of this and a longer debate at a

Jeff Sessions

3:30:39 to 3:31:02( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: different time of the year i think would help all of our colleagues. i do not believe that the success of negotiation of this treaty will in any way make the russians more cooperative as the administration has repeatedly suggested. russia has been inconsistent, at best, in helping the united states with the danger of

Jeff Sessions

3:31:03 to 3:31:24( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: nuclear iran and north korea, the gravest threats to peace in the world with military action being undertaken against our ally, south korea, in recent weeks and with the real possibility of an attack on iran's nuclear weapons that hopefully can be avoided.

Jeff Sessions

3:31:25 to 3:31:46( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: why -- why has russia not been more cooperative? they blocked -- russia attacked georgia, a sovereign nation, and continues to occupy georgian territory. this shocking askt aggression con -- act of aggression goes

Jeff Sessions

3:31:47 to 3:32:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: without united states response. georgia is pro-american, independent, whose attack was calculated and deliberate. russia continues to work to undermine the pro democracy movement in the ukraine. they continue a host of actions that evidence a long-term plan

Jeff Sessions

3:32:11 to 3:32:31( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: to affect a d reabsorbtion into what was the old soviet union. these offense transits have not been seriously considered throughout the quest for the treaty. events do not give me confidence that the treaty, therefore, is a positive step for the united

Jeff Sessions

3:32:32 to 3:32:53( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: states, the world, or for peace. secondly, as i noted and will not go into detail now, the administration conceded the drown-base -- ground-based interceptor site that would have been established in poland would

Jeff Sessions

3:32:54 to 3:33:14( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: have provided recountry ant protection to the united states and protected all of europe from an iranian missle. that was given away unilaterally by the administration without prior warning to our allies in poland and the cz republic. they heard about it in the paper. they realized that the united

Jeff Sessions

3:33:15 to 3:33:35( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: states had gone behind them, our allies, and made a deal with the russians and it was a very, very unfortunate event indeed. and the plan that has been talked about here, the fourth phase of the sm-3 phase adaptive approach is not even on the drawing board is unlikely to

Jeff Sessions

3:33:36 to 3:33:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: actually survive. it would be difficult to see it surviving five different budgets over the next 10 years it would take to develop that system. we walked away from one that could be deployed soon. now, i offered a sense of the senate resolution to make clear

Jeff Sessions

3:33:58 to 3:34:19( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: the senate does not concur in an conceived -- ill conceived vision of the administration that would move us to a world without nuclear weapons. i thank senators kyl, lemieux, cornyn, chambliss an inhofe for -- and inhofe for

Jeff Sessions

3:34:20 to 3:34:41( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: cosponsoring the amendment. i will not insist on a vote at this hour, this matter will be a significant subject for the future. the -- thirdly, i would suggest a treaty is promoted as a step toward a world free of nuclear weapons. this is a fantastical idea that goes beyond insignificance.

Jeff Sessions

3:34:42 to 3:35:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: it is dangerous. basing any policy, especially a nuclear policy on an idea as zero nuclear weapons in the world can only lead to confusion an uncertainty. confusion an uncertainty are the polar opposites of the necessary

Jeff Sessions

3:35:04 to 3:35:25( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: attributes of security and stability. these are the essentials of good stratigic policy, security and stability. thus the obama policy creates a more dangerous world. some way that the president's zero nukes policy is just a distant vision, some vague wish. don't worry. the situation would be much

Jeff Sessions

3:35:26 to 3:35:48( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: better if that were so. but it is not. president obama has made zero nuclear weapons a cornerstone of our defense policy. it has amazingly already been made a centerpiece of our military policy. being advanced by concrete steps to date.

Jeff Sessions

3:35:49 to 3:36:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: presidents, commanders in chief have the power to make such monumental changes in policy and this president is doing so. the change is seen most clearly in the nuclear posture review produced in april of 2010 by the defense department. this document is a formal

Jeff Sessions

3:36:11 to 3:36:31( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: document produced by the new administration's defense department. the determination to pursue the zero nuclear weapons vision is seen throughout this review. amazingly, there are 30 references in that document to a world without nuclear weapons. the n.p.r. begins with an

Jeff Sessions

3:36:32 to 3:36:53( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: introductory letter from secretary of defense gates, the second sentence of which says this, as the president said in prague last year a world without nuclear weapons will not be achieved quickly, but we must begin to take concrete steps today. close quote. the executive summary further

Jeff Sessions

3:36:54 to 3:37:16( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: drives the issue home. the first sentence in the executive summary recalls that president obama in prague highlighted the nuclear dangers and said -- quote -- "the united states will seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons." close quote. the first sentence in the second paragraph of the n.p.r. is

Jeff Sessions

3:37:17 to 3:37:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: particularly ominous and even chilling to me. posture reviews are defense reviews and by their nature a bottom-up reports driven by threat assessments and the requirements necessary to defend america. these reviews historically are objective analyses from experts,

Jeff Sessions

3:37:39 to 3:37:59( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: not political reports. the troubling line reads this: the 2010 nuclear posture review outlines the administration's approach to promoting the president's agenda for reducing nuclear dangers and pursuing the

Jeff Sessions

3:38:00 to 3:38:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: goal of a world without nuclear weapons. this statement reveals the whole truth. the n.p.r. is the president's policy sent from the top down, not the bottom up. stunningly the report lacks a clear focus on the only objective that counts, securing

Jeff Sessions

3:38:22 to 3:38:42( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: a nuclear arsenal second to none that can under any circumstances deter attacks on and defend the united states and its allies. fourthly, the obama vision of a world without nuclear weapons has not been well received. indeed the breadth of the

Jeff Sessions

3:38:43 to 3:39:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: criticism from experts, world leaders, is noteworthy. two years ago congress adopted an amendment that i proposed to call for a commission to review the stratigic posture of the united states. it was a bipartisan. chaired by former secretaries of defense an dr. william perry and dr. james schlesinger.

Jeff Sessions

3:39:04 to 3:39:25( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: the commission powerfully dismissed the idea of a world without nuclear weapons. in somewhat diplomatic, but in clear and strong language they said this -- quote -- "the conditions that might make possible the global elimination of global nuclear weapons are not present today and their

Jeff Sessions

3:39:26 to 3:39:49( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: creation would require a fundamental transformation of the world political order." close quote. it went on to say this, all of the commission members believe that reaching the ultimate goal of a -- of global nuclear elimination would require a fundamental change in g.o. politics.

Jeff Sessions

3:39:50 to 3:40:11( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: maybe the second coming. others have dismissed this concept as a wild -- french president sarkozy, our european ally, france said this -- quote -- "our nuclear deterrent -- he

Jeff Sessions

3:40:12 to 3:40:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: said, "our nuclear deterrent -- quote --"is neither a matter of prestige nor a question of rank. it is quite simply the nation's life insurance policy." close quote. he made clear they had no intention of giving that up. secretary james schlesinger, back when president reagan was meeting over nuclear issues made

Jeff Sessions

3:40:35 to 3:40:55( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: this wise comment, nuclear arsenals are going to be with us as long as there are sovereign states ideologies, unlike a laden with his lamp, we have no way to force the nuclear genie back into the bottle. a world without nuclear weapons is a utopian dream.

Jeff Sessions

3:40:56 to 3:41:16( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: close quote. keith payne who served on this nuclear commission writing recently on a national review said, the -- disarmament will deliver nonproliferation successes is a fantasy. on the contrary the united states nuclear arsenal has itself been the single most

Jeff Sessions

3:41:17 to 3:41:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: important tool for nonproliferation in history and dismantling it would be a huge setback. close quote. a member of the commission. jonathan teppeman in "newsweek" said -- quote -- "even if russia, china, france, israel, india and pakistan could be

Jeff Sessions

3:41:39 to 3:42:00( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: coaxed to abandon their weapons, we'd still live in fear that any one of them could quickly and secretly rearm." gideon rahman in "financial times" said the idea of a world free with nuclear weapons is not so much an impossible dream as an impossible nightmare." william crystal writing in "the

Jeff Sessions

3:42:01 to 3:42:22( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: washington post" in october said -- quote -- "yet to justify a world without nuclear weapons, what obama would really have to envision is a world without war or without threats of war. the danger is that the allure of a world without nuclear weapons can be a distraction, even an

Jeff Sessions

3:42:23 to 3:42:44( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: excuse, for not acting against real nuclear threats. so while obama talks of a future without nuclear weapons, the trajectory we are on today is toward a nuclear missle-capable north korea an iran and a far -- and iran and a far more dangerous world."

Jeff Sessions

3:42:45 to 3:43:06( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: others have written about this and i will make those remarks a part of the record. importantly, the administration's plan further diminishment of our nuclear stockpile -- further diminishment from these numbers and president obama's hostility to the utility of nuclear

Jeff Sessions

3:43:07 to 3:43:28( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: weapons generally has caused a great deal of unease among our nuclear allies. these nations are not so open about their concerns, but the problem is a very real one. the american nuclear umbrella, our extended deterrence, has allowed our allies, free

Jeff Sessions

3:43:29 to 3:43:50( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: democratic nations, to remain nuclear free without having nuclear weapons. but if the obama policy continues, th schlesinger report concludes real dangers remain await. if we are unsuccessful in dealing with current challenges, we may find ourselves at a

Jeff Sessions

3:43:51 to 3:44:12( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: tipping point where many additional states conclude that they require nuclear deter enters of their own. if this tipping point is itself mishandled, we may well find ourselves faced with a cascade of proliferation. close quote. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts.

Jeff Sessions

3:44:13 to 3:44:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: mr. kerry: madam president -- and i ask unanimous consent that the interruption not appear. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kerry: our party leader hoping to get a word. mr. sessions: all right. very good. mr. kerry: madam president -- mr. sessions: i ask consent to have the -- mr. kerry: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that there

Jeff Sessions

3:44:35 to 3:44:58( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: be -- i will ask for a quorum call, but i ask that the senator's comments not be interrupted in the record. i ask for the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will call the roll.

Jeff Sessions

3:44:59 to 3:45:23( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: quorum call:

Jeff Sessions

3:45:24 to 3:45:45( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i would ask that the quorum call be d with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sessions: and i will be wrapping up in about two minutes. so the nuclear commission president obama appointed a

Jeff Sessions

3:45:46 to 3:46:07( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: number of the members on the democratic side said that if our allies who feel they have been protected by our nuclear umbrella become uncertain, we could be faced with a cascade of proliferation. is that what we want? i know the president wants nonproliferation.

Jeff Sessions

3:46:08 to 3:46:30( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: i know that's what he want. i'm not attacking his goal. i'm raising the question throughout my remarks. are these goals going to be furthered by the actions of this treaty and the policies or whether they will not? so one final concern. the administration has made it clear that this treaty's nuclear

Jeff Sessions

3:46:31 to 3:46:52( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: reductions are just the first step in a long march to a nuclear-free world. assistant secretary rose goat mueller who negotiated -- rose goettemuller said we will also seek to seek nonstrategic, nondeployed nuclear weapons in

Jeff Sessions

3:46:53 to 3:47:13( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: further reductions. former ambassador alexander versbeaux a few weeks ago said the administration in follow-on talks will seek further reductions in strategic, nondeployed and nonstrategic weapons. and the president said that repeatedly.

Jeff Sessions

3:47:14 to 3:47:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: we senators in the end only have our judgment. my best judgment tells me that our weapons -- if our weapons fall too low in numbers, such an event could inspire rogue and dangerous lesser nuclear powers to seek to become peer

Jeff Sessions

3:47:35 to 3:47:56( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: competitors to the united states, a dangerous event for the entire world. and i must conclude that the obama plan is to diminish the power and leadership of the united states. carefully read, this is what the goal does.

Jeff Sessions

3:47:57 to 3:48:17( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: i think this conclusion could not be disputed. the leader of the one nation that has been the greatest force for freedom and stability in the world with our large nuclear arsenal is displaying a naivete beyond imagining. since this treaty is a

Jeff Sessions

3:48:18 to 3:48:30( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: calculated step and the president's plan to achieve dangerous and unacceptable policies, this treaty must not be ratified, the treaty and the policy behind it must be rejected.

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