-
The missiles in question are a missile defence shield. The Russians complain that this will weaken their nuclear deterrent because it means that Europe would be more likely to survive a counter strike if it launched a first strike. The Americans claim it is needed because of the threat from Iran and North Korea (they don't officially say Pakistan, but that too). CZ and PL remain scared of Russia.
So... The Russians are taking as a provocation CZ and PL hosting missiles that mean Russia could turn less of Europe into a nuclear wasteland. Yay for MAD doctrine.
Personally I'd rather the START disarmament talks were restarted and widened to include other nuclear powers, but given how hard it has been just to reduce the US and Russian stockpiles I suspect herding cats could be more successful.
Unilateral disarmament I think is not a great idea. You have no chips left with which to persuade other countries to give up their nukes.
It's a thorny one but not quite this cut and dried NATO=provocateur thing that people keep arguing.
You are reading a single comment by @MultiGrooves and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
h2o
@MultiGrooves
But surely taking the pointed missiles closer to Russia borders could be seen as unhelpful if not, provocative, no?