To be fair, I will presume that YOU intend to eliminate ALL those with any negative view of the US- Otherwise, they would still be a threat."the only way to reduce the possibility of deaths due to nuclear attack from such groups is to work toward eliminating the injustices that result in the existence of terrorist groups in the first place."

I know this one's going to be difficult for you to understand, beardedbruce, but I'm going to try to explain it to you anyway. I used the word "negotiate" in reference to what we do with people - ie: we negotiate with them. You can see the word "negotiate" used in context in some of my previous posts, in which you can see that I said we should "negotiate" with people. I used the word "eliminate" in reference to behaviors, not people. I know these kinds of subtle distinctions are way over your head, but I feel that it is important to try to help you understand them anyway.

What we need to do is eliminate the behavior we ourselves are engaging in so that we do not create the kind of situation that causes people to have a negative view of the US. It's our own behavior that has created this situation.

Do you think that we can remove ALL the perceived injustices in the world? How will you deal with opposing sides- Israel settlers Vs Palestinian terrorists- YOU claim you can get EVERYONE to agree the US is doing the right thing at all times? If not, YOU have no right to demand that a missile defense be 100% effective before it is worthwhile.

Of course we can't remove ALL of the perceived injustices in the world. But we can stop spreading injustice ourselves, and that would take care of a large percentage of the injustices of the world, and we could rely on the World Court to take care of most of the rest. Nevertheless, what I am advocating doesn't need to be 100 percent effective in order to prevent the destruction of the entire world. Yours does.