Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
GTCharlie: If we look at the past (cold war) all a missile defence of that nature will encourage is more missiles. The USSR and USA had over 100,000 nuclear warheads between the two at one stage to cope with 'unable' to launch (bombed) or shot down nukes.
And being the threat more of short - middle range. Waste of money..
Having Russia on side regarding the middle east is far more valuable logistically.
(kaŝi) Tenu vian eniran poŝtkeston pura arkivigante gravajn mesaĝojn kaj regule uzante la funkcion 'Nuligi ĉiujn mesaĝojn' en la enira poŝtkesto. (pauloaguia) (Montri ĉiujn konsilojn)