The new Wikileaks drop and today's Telegraph revelation that Obama agreed to throw the U.K. under the bus to get his START treaty is giving me flashbacks to Clinton's ChinaGate. It's not exactly the same thing, but exactly what diplomatic advantage is gained by giving our enemies defense secrets? Ours or anyone else's?
According to the Telegraph report:
Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week. Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.
The fact that the Americans used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the so-called “special relationship”, which is shown often to be a one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the WikiLeaks website.Ace suggests we give this one 24 hours and keep in mind:
One thing: WikiLeaks doesn't have all the diplomatic cables. It might be the case (in fact, I'dEven if that's the case, it seems to me that any allies we have left might be reluctant to trust us in the future. That is assuming that they still do, which is questionable.
bethope it is the case) that the US and UK had a side-deal where the UK blessed this exchange.
Nice Deb suggests that this might also violate Article 3 of the NATO treaty.
I'm waiting for the spin to begin so we can sift through and find the real story. Surely this can't be IT. But if it is, hearings should begin immediately and as Ed Morrissey says:
Regardless of what Obama thinks of American nuclear deterrents and policy, he has no right to undermine the policies of our closest ally and stalwart friend, especially as they fight with us in Afghanistan. Congress should immediately investigate this, and if possible the Senate should revoke its ratification of START.What a disgrace. Again.