Bobert:

"First of all thwere is failsafe measures that the country firing the offensive missle can use in the case of an "accident"...

So that argument is off the table..."

False conclusion. WE have such a systemn, and have offered it to the Russians, but there are a number of nuclear weapons which aee not under such control, both within NATA, and in other nations including the former Soviet Union.



"The second argument, however, of a terrorist launching an offensive missile is, while farfetched, somewhat valid... But in ordeer for that to happen the terrorist would have to have gone thru a massive checklist of preocedures in order to pull it off"

Again, a false conclusion from the present KNOWN inventory of nuclear weapons in the world- NOT including the ones in N. Korea, given out by Pakeustan, stolen from depots in the former Soviet Union, etc.


"... I'm not too sure what the chances are of a terrorist being able to penitrate the US or Russia but it is so small that it's perhaps not even worth discussion..."

Easily done, the shipping containers presently entering the US are just one example. Likelihood is 95% + (100% ability, about 5% that they would be caught)

"Now that brings up folks like Pakistan... or India... or Isreal that we are realistically talking about here...

Agreed???"

They are a PART of the problem, but far from the largest part.






"The problem is that if one is making a case for a US ABM system on Russia's doorstep based on the threat to the US by Pakistan one needs to rememeber that Pakistan does not have the felivery capabilities to hit the US... Not does India... Isreal??? Maybe..."


1. the ABM system proposed was for the KNOWN missiles from Iran ( the ones I have already shown the links to them HAVING NOW, or having under construction several years ago.

2. An attack on a US ally is, by treaty, considered the same as an attack on the US. I am sure the English and others in NATO would want us to keep our treaty obligations...




"So, the discussion comes down to the logis in placing a US ABM system on Russia's doorstep to protect the US from Isreal???"

False concliusion, as shown by my negation of your straw man arguement.






"If that is your argument, bb, and I'm not saying it is... But when one takes the window dressing off what you have said, I can't think of any other scenerio out there in the real world that would justify the US thinking that a ABM sysytem on Russia's doorstep would be of any value at all but..."

Then you have failed to think of the actual reality of the present nuclear weapons, the present delivery systems, and the real world.



Your comments about SDIO to me have about the same weight as MY comments about Blues singers would have to you.

You have expertise in Blues.