-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Russia warned against having nuclear bombers at Cuba.
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
dphantom
Diamond Member
1. Questionable at best. Both sides could and should have felt safer knowing a missile defense was in place that while not perfect, could provide enough of a probablity of intercepting missiles that the other side knew a first strike would be less than successful. So the counter-argument, while we will never know now of course, makes for interesting debate and discussion.
2. The USSR did have a working missile defense in place during that timeframe and still does today
3. Actually, it is several hundred miles from the Russian border and calling it names doesn't make it so. If you have facts supporting a cogent argument to back up your assertion, then please share.
4. Your opinion, backed up by neither thought or facts. In actuality, any country wants to be in a position where it can influence terms of an agreement. There is a big difference between influence and dictate.
Totally agree. The only reason to put interceptors in Poland or Czech is to counter a soviet nuclear attack on Europe. I'm a hard-core conservative but even I know the lame excuses Condi et al are using such as "it's only a handful of interceptors" is complete B.S. The Russians know we will grow that to 50, 100, 200+ within 10 - 15 yrs tilting the advantage in our favor -- because that's exactly what I'd do. This is nothing more than trying to fulfill Reagan's star wars plan from 20yrs ago. It's amazing how these politicians (from both sides of the isle) always insist on trying to finish old business or settle old scores so to speak. Toss them all out -- and I don't mean just the Repubs. I'm sick of the whole lot of them.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
-2 our and our allies aircraft were fired on before we did anything... Not to mention almost 3000 died when we were attacked on our own soil. Saddam may not have been involved in the planning or execution of 9/11 but he did harbor and protect individuals who were injured in Afghanistan when fighting for the organization who was behind 9/11.
Technically we didn't fire first and we followed through on the policy set forth by both congress and the president. The war on terror is against terrorist and any country harboring terrorists...
This is all off topic, before we put missiles in Europe, Russia was flying there heavy bomobers right up against (if not in) US and European airspace (in the last year) and we didn't publicly do anything.
And yes I think Cuba is a mute point and we should drop the embargo's after so many decades, I think the point has been made.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
I didn't say he was connected before or during but he did help people who were after 9/11.
Fern
Elite Member
Plus some above act like they've only recent come of age, seems they forgot Saddam struck first.
Jeebus people, he INVADED kuwait, Then he wouldn't live up to the agreement we so kindly gave him instead of kicking his @ss at that time like he deserved.
Everyone seems to forget the killing, raping, pilaging and setting all those oil wells on fire.
The Cuban embargo? Big Sh!t, it's our business if we don't want to trade with them. So we don't buy some sugar (they don't have anything else), who freakin cares.
At the end of the day it's just one less foreign country we aren't sending money. If we normalize relations with them I'm sure some @sshat in Congress will wanna send them our tax dollars.
Fern
badnewcastle
Golden Member
LOL!!!! So true.
jman19
Lifer
What's a "mute" point? 😕
Oh yeah, it's a frequently misused phrase that people who try too hard to sound smart use.
Anyway, the whole "they shot first" thing is totally insane... yea, they attacked first! How dare a nation attack a nation's forces that have moved in to their vicinity and are beating war drums...
There really is no defending our decision to go in there, especially when we know now that we were woefully unprepared for what we were getting ourselves in to.
Brainonska511
Lifer
We are all make mistakes. All we can hope for is to minimize them and try not to repeat them in the future.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
Per the cease fire agreement after the first Iraq War it was in the terms that Northern and Southern parts of Iraq were No Fly Zones (missles or planes), for the protection of believe it or not, Iraq and the nations around it US and Allies were to patrol these areas.
What about 80% of Americans who thought it was a good idea at the time??? We could only go on the evidence we had, now if that evidence proves un-true in the end, then that's where 20/20 comes in. But you haven't disproven the point that the world and our country are safer because of the war.
Hmm... yeah hind site is 20/20 even if you could disqualify my points which you have not been able to with any support, at the time we had UN and IAEA inspectors telling us WMD's were there and Saddam was not letting them inspect them. And members of Alqeda were treated in Iraq in Saddam's hospitals. A clear violation of the War on Terror of which Congress and the people both were for at the time.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
Agreed.
jman19
Lifer
The information at the time, and the 80% of American's who went along for the ride was in part tainted by the fact that faith was put in the administration after a time of crisis in this country. If you truly believe that the administration worked on all of the information that was available in a fair manner, then you are truly a fool. What happened was a total misuse of that trust and disservice to the American's who died in 2001.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
That faith you speak of was overwhelming because a combination of international and national bipartisan agencies with evidence supporting this so called faith. Anyways we hijacked this thread and should probably go back to the original topic of Russia putting bombers in Cuba.
Which if one were to take off with intent it would likely be blown up with minutes. And as someone else pointed out, we would need to worry about other things like Russia ICBM's.
jman19
Lifer
Of course Saddam deserved an asskicking for what he did in Kuwait, there is really no debate about it. However, I think just because we might be justified to do something doesn't mean we SHOULD. Was going back in to Iraq under the guise of WMD (with flimsy at best evidence, poor due diligence) or the breaking of a ceasefire worth the mess we are in now?
BeauJangles
Lifer
blown up in minutes by what, exactly? I think we as Americans have an overly bright view of our own defensive capabilities... Don't we only have ~15 aircraft on ready-to-go standby across the country?
I don't think that a bomber would last very long, but it certainly would cause a big scare.
badnewcastle
Golden Member
I was thinking more along the lines of an anit-aircraft missle from a ship based near Cuba. But you know that is just speculation.
Tell it to the US military leaders who advised Kennedy to nuke Russia first. You know the famous quote about two Americans left and one Russian means we won.
I know of no reason why this system could not become an offensive system, space-based weapons platforms for complete dominance across the planet.
Would you say it's ok for other nations to develop such a system, to take that risk?
Defending our nation is one thing, what if 'killing the other 6B people' helped our security?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
