reply to post by BiggerPicture
People often overlook small details in world politics, and give too much attention and credit to others.
Governments do not speak in the same manner as people do. For instance, Obama made a clear stand recently by saying that the sanctions that are in
place against Iran since 1995 will continue past May of 2012. It's fairly obvious since the US announced severe sanctions this year, but he also
added that the window for diplomacy is "shrinking" (his word) and that Iran must comply or face consequences.
Between two people, this is a rather obvious thing to say. But between governments it is not. When a gov tells another "you will face consequences"
it's a serious thing. In a "job" where the president chooses every single word and pause in his speech in order to not make mistakes about the
message, stating such a thing raises some concerns and the oil prices have been proof of that.
Add to this the even more stubborn Russian diplomacy they have been practicing lately, and I'm fairly concerned about how this things will pan out in
the recent future.
I'm not sure about the credibility of this news, since the US announced recently they will allow to disclose information about the missile shield to
the russians, but if in any case the Russian gov is in fact saying this, it's a whole different ball game.
There have been decades since the last time nuclear rhetoric was used, and it's scary to consider that they are going for it again. I guess history
does repeat itself quite often.
As for the people feeling safe because of the shield defense system against missiles, you guys should be more conscientious about it than you really
Having a shield doesn't mean it will work. People need to understand the reality of it.
We are talking about hitting a intercontinental missile traveling very fast with another missile. Usually the analogy used to explain it is to
consider it as the same as firing a bullet and then firing a second bullet to stop the first one.
This technology isn't new, and people should be aware that it's not bulletproof. During the Golf War the rate of success for the patriot missiles
was way lower than expected, and it's not like we fire nuclear missiles everyday to test the shield. It's all theoretical, and would only be proven
effective after use.
It's just another part of the equation of the M.A.D. plan. If you throw a shield into the equation, it turns the game in favor of the West.
But people also need to realize that the Russians aren't sleeping. They might have fallen a long way from past super-power status, but they still
have a very decent technology development, and there is nothing to prove us that they haven't figured out a way to pierce the same shield that NATO
wants to install.
We all need to be extra careful with things like this, and if people are aware, it's one way to stop a possible madness. If people continue to live
in illusions and false sentiments of security, we could make the wrong decision way too fast.