Memo to those who use the expression "Cold Warriors" (or with extra disdain, "ageing Cold Warriors") while discussing Russia/Ukraine: The only people in this conflict who want the Cold War back are in Moscow.
@anneapplebaum I very much doubt they are the only ones. Way too many shareholders in defense companies. So we need those "antimissile" sites in Poland and Romania to defend against possible Iranian ballistic missiles?
@simchaonn @anneapplebaum Romanian here. Did we need to join the USA in operations in both Iraq and Afganisthan and pay with blood for the privilege? Of course we did. So that we shelter from the Russians by joining NATO. Throwing Eastern European countries to the Russian won't buy you any comfort.
@GabrielaBota2 @anneapplebaum Interesting way of looking at it. But locating first strike missiles systems in Romania and Poland is clearly a legitimate cause of concern for the RF. I'm not sure why we should be surprised they don't like it. Makes a 1st strike viable for NATO.
@simchaonn @anneapplebaum Those systems are defensive. And what do you suggest? They should be removed because Putin has been striken by the imperial syndrome? And both countries experienced Russian invasions in the past so their concerns regarding their own defense are legit.
@GabrielaBota2 @anneapplebaum Our Russian friends argue those systems come in "boxes" which cannot be inspected. Offensive missile systems can be substituted at a moments notice and it cannot be detected. Is that argument incorrect?
@GabrielaBota2 @anneapplebaum Putin doesn't sound like a very nice man. But any Russian leader who allowed their country to have no answer to a NATO first strike would probably not be very popular with the security apparatus of the RF. Is it inconvenient to your argument to answer my question?
@simchaonn @anneapplebaum I have no problem with your argument as I'm aware that systems can be repurposed. But as far as I know a war threat against Ukraine by Russia is by no means "a NATO first strike".
@GabrielaBota2 @anneapplebaum When I read the Russian press, they characterize it somewhat differently. I think the key issue they raise is the possibility of locating missiles which can hit Moscow within 7 mins. This makes a 1st strike against the RF a viable strategy. Didnt the RF issue written proposals?