Im slightly annoyed at the medias portrayal of Putin. Hes not a boogeyman, despite being the spokesperson of Russia and having vast power, most of the Duma and government officials are behind him voluntarily. Hell, even ordinary citizens approve.(To be fair though, they have been drinking kool-aid for a while now.)
They would still have some strike back capability and is it worth going nuclear over some non NATO nation in Europe? We take the risk of having a major city hit with a nuclear attack, which could kill millions in seconds. Over a nation which has close ties with Russia and use to be part of them? Would be totally dumb.:P
That's not how you hit them. You hit them on their way down when they are on a free gravity trajectory and less maneuverable. Not when they are going up. We have a system that we designed with Israel that is similar to the Iron Dome system but was made for ICBM's. Originally it was designed to fight against Iran but it's been modified and tested by the DoD for long range ballistic targets. The last 6 tests have been successful.
Is it a bad thing that Mr. Putin is so secure in faith in his military?
Is it truly a bad thing that he knows what they're capable of? No? Then what's the big deal?
The United States could take over the entire world if we wanted to. Everyone knows that. Someone coming out and saying it doesn't make any difference.
ill probably be infracted for this post
"The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."
I don't want to alarm you, but we've been able to shoot down icbm's mid flight since the 80's. See Reagan's Star Wars plans. Why do you think we have so much oceanic superiority? One of their jobs is to target and bring down potential icbm's and they can do that with everything from kinetic forces, to explosives in air, to new age lasers that fry the missile in a matter of seconds.
As a liberal, I don't like that my military dumps a trillion into defense every year while the rest of America crumbles, but the one thing we are is prepared for a conventional war.
Hey at least they have fun ;P
Neither is Finland, Finland is the meat wall. A russian invasion of Sweden could only happen by sea or air. Damn you Frenchies for selling them those Mistrals. lol
Sweden and Finland are negotiating for a host member status as we speak though. I believe both countries are part of the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme, Sweden is for certain, it's one of the more active nations on that account, the armed forces got representatives at the International Special Forces Command/Center in Tampa(I believe Sweden and Australia are the only none NATO countries) etc as well.
The nerve is called the "nerve of awareness". You cant dissect it. Its a current that runs up the center of your spine. I dont know if any of you have sat down, crossed your legs, smoked DMT, and watch what happens... but what happens to me is this big thing goes RRRRRRRRRAAAAAWWW! up my spine and flashes in my brain... well apparently thats whats going to happen if I do this stuff...
I did say with the advantage of US weaponry. Our weaponry is nearly 20 yeArs ahead of the next best country according to the UN. I feel bad for the country that tries to go conventional war with the US. We have this bloated military that's been aching for a conventional war for 60 years now.
"The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."
Ever heard of nuclear subs? Russia has those too.:P No sane person would even contemplate a nuclear strike at a nation with the capability of strike back with nuclear weapons. Even sub par North Korea would be a huge mistake to attack them. There would always be a chance they could get one nuclear strike back and we are not talking about a A bomb used in WW2 on Japan. That would like comparing a firecracker with a stick of dynamite. :P
"The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."