Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dawnsblood
we will cease building the ineffective antinuclear missile defense sites in Eastern Europe in return for him joining the boycott.

How ineffective is it? He asserts its ineffective. If its ineffective, why would Russia complain about it? Is she concerned we might be throwing good money away and wasting America's hard-earned tax dollars?

the Bush administration's emphasis on pursuing the antimissile system, without Russia's cooperation, still baffles many national security experts.

I wonder where we find these national security experts that can't figure out the value of an anti-missile system...

The antimissile system strengthens the relationship between Eastern Europe and NATO, with real troops and equipment on the ground. It mocks Mr. Putin's dream of eventually restoring Russian hegemony over Eastern Europe.

... when even the dull and witless Mr. Schumer can see the value of it. He doesn't oppose it because its ineffective, on the contrary, he sees great value in it, as does Mr. Putin, and it is for that reason he wants smother it in its crib.

4 posted on 06/03/2008 5:07:01 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: marron
If its ineffective, why would Russia complain about it?

Well put.

20 posted on 06/04/2008 10:25:47 PM PDT by T. Buzzard Trueblood ("a wee bit silly." -Lord Trimble on Hillary Clinton's claim of foreign policy "experience".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson