reflexblue

I read your post it boiles down to this you could get the same theoretical defense by placing a guided missile cruiser in the North Sea and not piss off people that we Have to eventually work with .... As someone that lived through the worst days of the cold war in the early Sixties i'm glad you and like minded people are NO Longer in Charge.

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.

DarrylS

The increase was from 1600 to 2000 troops, whoop de doo.. that was a huge increase..

This was a tough decision, that is subject to ridicule today by the less informed hysterical type, made by the leader of our great country..

It is not as though he is abandoning the Poles, he is replacing that theoretical system with a less expensive theoretical system..

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

Stokes

I'm not trying to say that power and threats are the only way to go when it comes to international diplomacy, like anything there's a balance. THE most important thing when dealing internationally though is to remember who is your ally and who is your enemy. Iran wants to gain a nuclear weapon and destroy Israel, that makes them an enemy. Russia still has nuclear weapons pointed at all of our major cities, that makes them an enemy. We can and should deal with these nations diplomatically, it serves our interests to do so. What we should not do is go out of our way to appease them and expect an equal response, that is not the way international politics works. Even if you think the sites in Poland were a waste, knowing that Russia doesn't want them there is a good bargaining chip. Why should we get rid of that chip before securing something meaningful in return? If using Russain airspace is good enough in return to you then fine, I was looking a little higher myself.

Don't forget what precipitated THE most dangerous situation of the early 60's cold war, it was Russia's response to perceived weakness from an inexperienced US President they thought they could roll over. You may be happy that cold war era politicians are not in charge here, but they ARE still in charge over there (Putin), so we should not expect an outpouring of support and goodwill from them in return for our concessions.

reflexblue

Missile shield decision clears tension in Russia-U.S. relations | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire

Leading expert on Russian-American relations Thomas Graham, a former advisor to the previous U.S. administration, comments on the decision by Barack Obama to shelve plans for a missile shield in Europe. Mr. Graham is a senior director at consulting firm Kissinger Associates in New York. He shared his views on the issue in an interview with RIA Novosti New York Bureau Chief Dmitry Gornostaev.


- Mr. Graham what do you think about the decision by the U.S. administration to shelve plans for the missile shield in Europe? Do you consider it in a positive or negative light? How do you assess it from the point of view of U.S.-Russia relations, U.S. security and defense capabilities, U.S. relations with Poland and the Czech Republic?

- Overall, the decision is positive. It removes a significant irritant in U.S.-Russian relations. It does not harm U.S. security or erode our defense capabilities because Iran is still years from developing a long-range missile. Indeed, it could enhance U.S. security and defense capabilities by focusing on defenses against short and medium

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.

Stokes

Of course it clears tensions, we gave them what they wanted! Hey ultimately the proof is in the pudding, if this decision leads to Russia making significant concessions on Iran then it was a good one. I just don't see anything either historically or in their recent comments to suggest this will be the case.

We also should be forward thinking in our missile defense plans as Iran is still developing long range capabilities, and we should definitely not trust our intelligence estimates as necessarily correct as to their current progress (WMDs anyone?).

patsfan13

Well when they annex the Ukraine and Georgia that will relieve tensions also...

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

reflexblue

If i thought this wasn't so clear cut i would spend a lot of time countering your arguments but i don't and neither do most experts in US-Russian relations....Also i have dyslexia and it would take quite a long time. i don't want to spend that much of an effort into some thing i think is obvious.
Its pragmatic.

IMO your view point is anachronstic, the world has become to interdependent. If you read the response by Grahm (and he was in Bushes adm.) he states that we are safer by not placing these bases in Poland and Czechoslovakia. I'll take his side in this, because now it opens the door for reducing ICBMs.

All one needs to think about is that the Russians are paranoid from hundreds of years of being invaded from the West. The last thing we need to do is put missiles in their back yard, they did that here ( Cuba) how did that work out?

I read news sites such as Russia Today and Pravda i nitice two things, paranoia and a need for respect which they never got from Bush.

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.