3 ms·
I was going to say that the US was limited by the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (the Soviets and the US were limited to two ABM installations each), but the US
by chiph 6y ago
I was going to say that the US was limited by the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (the Soviets and the US were limited to two ABM installations each), but the US left the treaty in 2002, because of the threat posed by Iran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty
- fuoqi 6y ago>because of the threat posed by Iran. Do you seriously believe this nonsense? The pull was clearly targeted against Russia, in the same way as pull from the INF was targeted mostly against China. Russia even has proposed to share radar data on its south borders with NATO systems, but to no avail.
- throwawayffffas 6y agoAn anti-ballistic missile treaty no longer makes sense, when there were only two or three sides and all of them had enough missiles to overwhelm their adversary, there is no point in even trying to build an ICBM defense program. There is a huge precedent of ICBM defense programs being canceled due to large costs and questionable benefits in the face of a full scale attack from Russia. That is no longer the case, now North Korea has a handful of missiles, with no ballistic missile defense the US would be vulnerable to an attack from North Korea. Sure, such an attack would result in a retaliation. But the duty of the government is not to avenge it's citizens but to protect them in the first place.
- DiogenesKynikos 6y agoThere's a classic clip of Putin breaking out in laughter when an interviewer suggests the missile shield in Eastern Europe is meant to defend against Iran: https://youtu.be/7LyfwHYB8xw https://youtu.be/7LyfwHYB8xw