[Kalobbis]

You still treat us like an enemy and it is you who making us your enemy not we do. We just react on your attitude towards us. Treat you like enemies? If we bother to even think of you at all, it is usually as a pathetic annoyance, not an enemy. But it reality, we hardly think about you at all.

[johnsonjunior]

Originally posted by Serb
Maybe not, but I'm sure in near future you'll face a really big troubles and lose your superpower status.

That's a far cry from total political collapse.

[ZesePreodaNed]

We've already had nukes there, IIRC. Any time a ship carrying them docks...

[zlopikanikanza]

Originally posted by David Floyd
...the US has valid security concerns - not concerns about Russia, but concerns about Iran ... I don't think our spoken concerns are valid. Iran doesn't have a missile that has the range to endanger what we're supposedly trying to protect. And its made no threats in that direction. I certainly think Russia has more valid concerns about this situation than we do.

On the other hand, placing Russian bombers in Cuba would only be for the purpose of threatening the U.S. (and other neighbors) and would be in violation of the agreement that ended the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Monroe Doctrine. If they put bombers in Cuba & I were Prez, I'd bomb the bombers.

[AdobebePhoto]

Jewish saying: "I'm an old man. And I've had many troubles. Most of which have never happened."

I think we have better things to do that to build a defense system against a threat that does not exist and isn't likely to exist in the near future. --Especially when our "defense system" threatens a world power like Russia.

BTW: Even if Iran had (a) the missile and (b) the warhead, do you think it would use them if they knew that such use would lead to a overwhelming nuclear retaliation by the U.S. and other word powers.

[DoctoNilsonDen]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
BTW: Even if Iran had (a) the missile and (b) the warhead, do you think it would use them if they knew that such use would lead to a overwhelming nuclear retaliation by the U.S. and other word powers. Which part of the logic of a suicide bomber did you miss, Z. If you are willing to die for your cause by inflicting specific damage anyway, retaliation is not a credible threat. Mutual deterrence depends on all players believing all the other players will avoid killing their own grandchildren. Otherwise it gets real bright and warm in the site of every major city in the world for a few minutes. Then nobody plays civilization anymore.