Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article should be renamed US bases. By adding the near Russia clause it just becomes laughable.
Only Kazakhstan really fits into this description as it actually borders Russia. A case could be made about Japan but even that's pushing it.
You don't really have a good grasp of what constitutes a threat now as opposed to 50 years ago. The TU-160
Blackjack has a range of almost 8000 miles. That can put it well into the airspace of Canada and these planes have been seen cruising ARMED in the central Atlantic. These planes are a threat to the continental US because they carry a lot of nukes and can hit places as far south as Miami if they wanted too. No part of the US that matters cannot be hit.
It's clearly the same with Russia. The US can hit anywhere in Russia by using the bases in Japan the ME and Europe and yes even the bases in Morocco. These planes are only one of a myriad devices the the US and Russia use to threaten one another.
It's really pointless and Orwellian. Really. How many times do we have to nuke the world into oblivion?
You don't really have a good grasp of what constitutes a threat now as opposed to 50 years ago. The TU-160
Blackjack has a range of almost 8000 miles. That can put it well into the airspace of Canada and these planes have been seen cruising ARMED in the central Atlantic. These planes are a threat to the continental US because they carry a lot of nukes and can hit places as far south as Miami if they wanted too. No part of the US that matters cannot be hit.
It's clearly the same with Russia. The US can hit anywhere in Russia by using the bases in Japan the ME and Europe and yes even the bases in Morocco. These planes are only one of a myriad devices the the US and Russia use to threaten one another.
It's really pointless and Orwellian. Really. How many times do we have to nuke the world into oblivion?
Obviously, the presence of nukes assures that a country can put up a fight. Both the US and Russia have provoked each other on multiple occasions, whether it's the US in the Black Sea or Russia near the coast of Alaska. However, those are international waters and every country has a right to use them.
Well we never really nuked the world into oblivion. The only time nukes were used against a civilian population was during WW2 and those nukes were far less powerful than what we have today.
It should surprise nobody that a country seeking protection from Russia would invite the US to help protect them. Really, this isn't rocket science.
Will you protest if Russia places a missiles in the Cube? Of course, to protect against the US attack. Or if Russia will starts supplying weapons to Mexicans. I think that some Mexican guys would not mind taking the chair of the Mexican president and Russia must help them in their democratic choice.
What's so surprising about Mongolia? It's completely surrounded by Russia and China, how are American troops and military equipment supposed to get there?
Iraq isn't as close to America as Mexico but you still got 2004 and George Bush.
Will you protest if Russia places a missiles in the Cube? Of course, to protect against the US attack. Or if Russia will starts supplying weapons to Mexicans. I think that some Mexican guys would not mind taking the chair of the Mexican president and Russia must help them in their democratic choice.
Just invade Mexico and call it "protection from America", problem solved. But that's the terminology of nato, "protection racketerring" means "invited".
Just invade Mexico and call it "protection from America", problem solved. But that's the terminology of nato, "protection racketerring" means "invited".
The invade is savagery in the modern world. First of all, it must be recognized that a drug barons are genuine patriots of Mexico. Then, several tens of thousands of people must overthrow the president in a bloody coup. And new young democratic (people, not soldiers, overthrew the president!) government will need strong protection.
Even if Russia had the physical capability, it could not because Mexico already has a democracy. They change their government often enough through the democratic process. Russia and its remaining colonies don't have this process. There is no way to claim that their governments are legitimate since a choice is not available.
Russia protects authoritarian regimes from their own people more than from outsiders. See Assad for the latest of many examples.
^ How are countries like Czechia, Ukraine or Bulgaria/Serbia totalitarian? What's with all the people who have missed what happened in 1989, were they all locked in virtual reality to miss the fall of communism and the years of democracy since 1989?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
