[Tailgunner Joe]

It only requires that two large powers regard themselves as having respective spheres of influence, and react negatively when one enters the other.

This is your problem. You are stuck in the cold war. The world doesn't operate that way anymore. Today, the US sphere of influence is the whole world, and Russia has no sphere of influence at all. When Russia reacts negatively to us, we don't care, because we are advancing our own interests, not Russia's. We are expanding NATO to expand our own sphere of influence, at Russia's expense. You need to pick a side, our side. The missile interceptors in Poland are for the defense of the USA, not Poland. That is a fact no matter how many times you deny it. As far as I'm concerned, there is no reason why our missile shield should not cover the entire world. The only reason not to put it in Poland is to capitulate to Russia's demands, which we have absolutely no reason at all to do. Restricting the scope of our missile shield is not in America's interests in any way at all, it is only in the interests of our enemy, Russia.

[americanophile]

Well...I can't say I agree with your first statement, that I 'have a problem.' If anything, I don't think I'm stuck in the Cold War either...I'm trying to move past it, since I don't see Russia as the threat to eastern Europe that some do...I mean, does anyone really expect them to roll tanks into the Czech Republic? Moreover, I don't think Iran poses a threat to eastern Europe under any realistic scenario that I can think of. I am on our side, which is why I think we can have a perfectly effective missile defense system that covers North America, doesn't impose on the Europeans, is more cost effective, and doesn't push Russia toward Iran.

At what point does the European Union provide for its own defense?