<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with antiballisticmissiletreaty</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/antiballisticmissiletreaty</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'antiballisticmissiletreaty' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:42 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:42 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/13053/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27018-2001Dec11.html"&gt;Bush to Withdraw From ABM Treaty. &lt;/a&gt; &quot;Last week we conducted another promising test of our missile defense technology. For the good of peace, we&apos;re moving forward with an active program to determine what works and what does not work. In order to do so, we must move beyond the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, a treaty that was written in a different era, for a different enemy,&quot; Bush said.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.13053</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:42 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>abm</category>
		<category>AntiBallisticMissileTreaty</category>
		<category>missiledefence</category>
		<category>missledefense</category>
		<dc:creator>Bezuhin</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/12370/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011115/ts/summit_dc_17.html"&gt;Bush woos Putin at his Texas ranch&lt;/a&gt;  - after apparently &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;failing to come to a consensus about the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Good for Bush for getting his diplomacy on, but -- I&apos;m wondering how popular the proposed American missile-defense system is with members of the Metafilter community. If it means scrapping the ABM... is it worth it?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.12370</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2001 07:27:10 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>abm</category>
		<category>antiballisticmissiletreaty</category>
		<category>diplomacy</category>
		<category>georgewbush</category>
		<category>texas</category>
		<category>vladimirputin</category>
		<dc:creator>SilentSalamander</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/7847/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/20GERM.html"&gt;The Republican Administration is ready to back out of the verification and enforcement protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention&lt;/a&gt; , only their latest move after &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/03/08/world/08KORE.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;abandoning talks with North Korea&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; on ending their nuclear and missile programs, slashing &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/03/29/world/29POLI.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;assistance to Russia for dismantling their nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons infrastructure&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; in the new budget, going ahead with plans to &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/05/12/world/12MISS.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;unilaterally abrogate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; that underlies nuclear arms control, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/world/09SPAC.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;preparing to place weapons in outer space&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.  It&apos;s not a secret that the Administration is leaning toward &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/world/09ARMS.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;tearing down the entire edifice of strategic arms control&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, but you would think there would be more of an outcry that the Republicans seem hell-bent on making the world a noticeably &lt;i&gt;less&lt;/i&gt; safe place as quickly as possible... especially taking into account the &lt;a href=&quot;http://channel.nytimes.com/2001/05/07/world/07EURO.html&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;other foreign policy faux-pas&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; they&apos;ve committed in the past four months.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.7847</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2001 01:29:51 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>antiballisticmissiletreaty</category>
		<category>biologicalwarfare</category>
		<category>biologicalweaponsconvention</category>
		<category>chemicalweapons</category>
		<category>enforcementprotocols</category>
		<category>foreignpolicy</category>
		<category>missiles</category>
		<category>nonproliferation</category>
		<category>northkorea</category>
		<category>nuclearweapons</category>
		<category>republicanparty</category>
		<category>russia</category>
		<category>strategicarmscontrol</category>
		<category>wmds</category>
		<dc:creator>SenshiNeko</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


