23 March 2006

spectrvm: (Default)
What both of these camps overlook is that the sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one -- as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal -- if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85204-p30/keir-a-lieber-daryl-g-press/the-rise-of-u-s-nuclear-primacy.html

Вывод только один - США должны быть уничтожены. Мы должны нажать на кнопку первыми. Если миру суждено сгореть, то пусть он сгорит вместе с Америкой а не без нее.

Profile

spectrvm: (Default)
spectrvm

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
4 5678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 23 June 2025 15:22
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios