Kremlin Signals a Harder Line on Relations With the U.S.

[Shogun]

hey dude... in tis age of the hindsight of the iraq war you really have no ground to make some excuse regarding the moral authority of US actions anywhere in the world. Instead of realizing how OUR actions have CAUSES Russia to arm itslef, much like WE WOULD when Cuba gets ITS nuke silos, you keep reaching for excuses...


when.. again... we knew damn well how this would play out two years ago. Now, you may be of the mind that King US should ahve open jurisdiction on the entire globe but, as you can see, the rest of the world (that we don't have in our pocket) disagrees.


but hey.. if YOU want to push buttons then don't be shocked when reactions happen. Looking for some way to blame Russia for reacting to a fucking American nuke silo in their back yard is a fools attempt to insist that their shit smells lovely despite the gathering flies.


ps.. this is nothing less than this decades version of REAGANS fucked up Star Wars program. Want to keep wondering why arms races happen? Thats fine.. But, you have to ignore your instigation when you do.

FINALLY! Thank you for admitting you don't know what you are talking about. The US is not putting nukes in Europe. Not since Reagan and Gorby agreed on the IMF Treaty and we removed our Pershing IIs. We're putting missiles that shoot down missiles in Europe. Call it Star Wars pejoratively if you want. Reagan's Star Wars was a bluff that worked. Drove the Soviets into xenophobic bankruptcy.

In the instant case, while accusing me of not thinking the US's shit stinks, you run around acting like only the US's shit stinks. I got news bud, everyone's shit stinks. Every country on the face of the planet has interactive interests internationally. We pursue our policies to achieve our foreign policy goals. Some moves on the global chess board are blatant and obvious, but that is a VERY tiny percentage.

When dealing with large and independent actors like Russia and China, the levers you can use against them are few and typically large and complex. Ascribing simplistic notions to multi-year and multi-dimensional policy initiatives is foolish. Ultimately, you may agree with Putin that Europe should be Russia's whipping boy that he can by turns intimidate by nuclear threat and/or intimidate by withholding gas supplies.

If that's the kind of world you think is better, I think I have to disagree with you. The missile shield would provide at least a partial option to the Europeans. But, perhaps, you would prefer total disengagement and isolation?

HA!

yea, dude! It SURE DID WORK! I mean, here we are 20 fucking years later STILL playing the same game of Ironic Roulette... Only THIS TIME around the bluff isn't working quite like you thought it would, eh? Hence the layers upon LAYERS of excuses.

I would prefer not to cry foul AFTER reaching for a sucker punch. If you want to militarize the globe under our dominant control then at least be honest about it. Hell, in reality your opinion isn't that far removed from all those big scary russians currently aiming their missiles at poland and increasing their nuclear capabilities. Indeed, it WOULD take a fucking 80s Reaganite throwback to reflexively knee jerk excuses in the shadow of fake outrage of a predictable russian reaction to American missiles in Russia's back yard, wouldn't it?

 

[Shogun]

Weren't you taking notes during the Cuban Missile Crisis? You put nukes in Cuba and it is an act of war against the US. Dust off your copy of the Monroe Doctrine.

....which is a pretty fucking ironic reaction to NUKES IN YOUR BACK FUCKING YARD, eh?



check mate. Way to think a couple steps ahead. Why do you think I used that specific example?

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

just like there are no nukes in israel, eh buddy? Hell, why WOULDN'T russia TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT?





Like i said, motherfucker. Way to think a few moves ahead.

 

[Shogun]

Now, there could be something the US did to Russia to cause it to be intransigent on the Iran issue.

The old Soviet Union has always had an interest in the middle east, starting before World War 2. I would even venture to say that they began to get involved in the 1920s after the Ottoman Empire fell and they became the Soviet Union. Most of the wars fought between Israel and other countries were fought with American technology from Israel and Soviet Union technology from Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, etc.

It's been that way until the 1980s and even the 1990s under the Clinton Administration after the first Gulf War. Arab countries, in exchange for making peace with Israel, got American military technology. Coinciding with the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia lost a lot of defense contracts with Arab countries. You also see Russia trying to gain influence in South America because of the influence it lost with the middle east. The only country Russia has been able to maintain control with is Iran because of their hard line against America and American interests.

Iran is Russia's last grasp in the Middle East. If Iran falls, one of Russia's biggest customers falls. That's probably why Russia has setup Iran with a nuke, because they know an attack on Iran would be much less likely.

I'll agree with that. Also, Russia has recently made significant weapons contracts with Syria, trying to get a little of that shine back on their military industrial complex. That and they found out that Israel was supplying Georgia with weapons....ooops! So they decided to visit a little pain in Israel's direction.....by proxy of course.

Russia is playing the same role with Iran that the Us is with israel. Lemme guess.. THEY are wrong while WE are righteous, right?

Hell, you think DavidS has never tried to validate the arms we sell israel with financial excuses?

The fact remains that if you play the game then you'd best expect the game to be played. Acting with manufactured outrage at easily predictable reactions really doesn't impress me.

 

[Tech_Esq]

....which is a pretty fucking ironic reaction to NUKES IN YOUR BACK FUCKING YARD, eh?



check mate. Way to think a couple steps ahead. Why do you think I used that specific example?

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

just like there are no nukes in israel, eh buddy? Hell, why WOULDN'T russia TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT?





Like i said, motherfucker. Way to think a few moves ahead.

Please. If you are going to just make up facts to suit your argument, then I'm out. Have fun.

 

[Tech_Esq]

The old Soviet Union has always had an interest in the middle east, starting before World War 2. I would even venture to say that they began to get involved in the 1920s after the Ottoman Empire fell and they became the Soviet Union. Most of the wars fought between Israel and other countries were fought with American technology from Israel and Soviet Union technology from Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, etc.

It's been that way until the 1980s and even the 1990s under the Clinton Administration after the first Gulf War. Arab countries, in exchange for making peace with Israel, got American military technology. Coinciding with the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia lost a lot of defense contracts with Arab countries. You also see Russia trying to gain influence in South America because of the influence it lost with the middle east. The only country Russia has been able to maintain control with is Iran because of their hard line against America and American interests.

Iran is Russia's last grasp in the Middle East. If Iran falls, one of Russia's biggest customers falls. That's probably why Russia has setup Iran with a nuke, because they know an attack on Iran would be much less likely.

I'll agree with that. Also, Russia has recently made significant weapons contracts with Syria, trying to get a little of that shine back on their military industrial complex. That and they found out that Israel was supplying Georgia with weapons....ooops! So they decided to visit a little pain in Israel's direction.....by proxy of course.

Russia is playing the same role with Iran that the Us is with israel. Lemme guess.. THEY are wrong while WE are righteous, right?

Hell, you think DavidS has never tried to validate the arms we sell israel with financial excuses?

The fact remains that if you play the game then you'd best expect the game to be played. Acting with manufactured outrage at easily predictable reactions really doesn't impress me.

You assume too much. It's a big game and a big stage. Everyone pursues their interests as they see it. Right and wrong doesn't much come in to it. Power usually wins unless it beats itself or fools itself.

The winners get to say what "right" was. That's the way it REALLY goes. You mistake me for some kind of "the US is always pure as the driven snow and we only do things for righteous purposes" kind of guy. I'm not. I'm a "real politick" kind of guy. We'll do what we do for our reasons. And I don't see a hell of a lot of reason to apologize for it. And, if someone sticks missiles in Cuba, we'll do what ever we do to react to that situation including making a bunch of public caterwauling about it just like Russia is. See how it works?

 

[Shogun]

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

just like there are no nukes in israel, eh buddy? Hell, why WOULDN'T russia TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT?





Like i said, motherfucker. Way to think a few moves ahead.

Please. If you are going to just make up facts to suit your argument, then I'm out. Have fun.

oh, you mean "make up facts" like "gosh, guy, why would russia react to American missiles in their back yard when WE WOULD DO THE SAME IF CUBA HAD RUSSIAN MISSILES?"




The fact is, YOU don't know what will be installed in those locations and Russia has even cause to be as suspicious as YOU would be in the little Cuba scenario you slipped up with. If you want to exit stage left, conveniently, because I've expressed how stupid the notion is that they SHOULD TRUST THE FUCKING WEST IN THEIR BACK YARD then so be it. I wouldn't expect a Reaganite throwback to do much more than wave a fucking flag and keep looking strait ahead anyway

 

[Shogun]

I'll agree with that. Also, Russia has recently made significant weapons contracts with Syria, trying to get a little of that shine back on their military industrial complex. That and they found out that Israel was supplying Georgia with weapons....ooops! So they decided to visit a little pain in Israel's direction.....by proxy of course.

Russia is playing the same role with Iran that the Us is with israel. Lemme guess.. THEY are wrong while WE are righteous, right?

Hell, you think DavidS has never tried to validate the arms we sell israel with financial excuses?

The fact remains that if you play the game then you'd best expect the game to be played. Acting with manufactured outrage at easily predictable reactions really doesn't impress me.

You assume too much. It's a big game and a big stage. Everyone pursues their interests as they see it. Right and wrong doesn't much come in to it. Power usually wins unless it beats itself or fools itself.

The winners get to say what "right" was. That's the way it REALLY goes. You mistake me for some kind of "the US is always pure as the driven snow and we only do things for righteous purposes" kind of guy. I'm not. I'm a "real politick" kind of guy. We'll do what we do for our reasons. And I don't see a hell of a lot of reason to apologize for it. And, if someone sticks missiles in Cuba, we'll do what ever we do to react to that situation including making a bunch of public caterwauling about it just like Russia is. See how it works?

I see exactly how it works. And when YOU react in the exact same fashion to Cuban Missiles as Russia does with Polish missiles then be sure to make your little speech about the personal exclusivity of righteousness during our next instance of mutually assured destruction.


another reagan era piece of political jargon to hit our lexicon, no less.

 

[DavidS]

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

 

[DavidS]

The old Soviet Union has always had an interest in the middle east, starting before World War 2. I would even venture to say that they began to get involved in the 1920s after the Ottoman Empire fell and they became the Soviet Union. Most of the wars fought between Israel and other countries were fought with American technology from Israel and Soviet Union technology from Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, etc.

It's been that way until the 1980s and even the 1990s under the Clinton Administration after the first Gulf War. Arab countries, in exchange for making peace with Israel, got American military technology. Coinciding with the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia lost a lot of defense contracts with Arab countries. You also see Russia trying to gain influence in South America because of the influence it lost with the middle east. The only country Russia has been able to maintain control with is Iran because of their hard line against America and American interests.

Iran is Russia's last grasp in the Middle East. If Iran falls, one of Russia's biggest customers falls. That's probably why Russia has setup Iran with a nuke, because they know an attack on Iran would be much less likely.

I'll agree with that. Also, Russia has recently made significant weapons contracts with Syria, trying to get a little of that shine back on their military industrial complex. That and they found out that Israel was supplying Georgia with weapons....ooops! So they decided to visit a little pain in Israel's direction.....by proxy of course.

Russia is playing the same role with Iran that the Us is with israel. Lemme guess.. THEY are wrong while WE are righteous, right?

Hell, you think DavidS has never tried to validate the arms we sell israel with financial excuses?

The fact remains that if you play the game then you'd best expect the game to be played. Acting with manufactured outrage at easily predictable reactions really doesn't impress me.

We started playing the game with Israel BECAUSE of the Soviet Union selling weapons to other middle eastern countries before the modern existence of Israel. The United States needed to have some kind of presence in the middle east to counter the overwhelming presence of the Soviet Union. ESPECIALLY after World War 2 and the Soviet Union's expansion into Eastern Europe.

If you want to play a game of chicken and the egg, the egg is Russia's influence in the middle east which hatched the chicken of the us' involvement with israel.

 

[Tech_Esq]

just like there are no nukes in israel, eh buddy? Hell, why WOULDN'T russia TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT?





Like i said, motherfucker. Way to think a few moves ahead.

Please. If you are going to just make up facts to suit your argument, then I'm out. Have fun.

oh, you mean "make up facts" like "gosh, guy, why would russia react to American missiles in their back yard when WE WOULD DO THE SAME IF CUBA HAD RUSSIAN MISSILES?"




The fact is, YOU don't know what will be installed in those locations and Russia has even cause to be as suspicious as YOU would be in the little Cuba scenario you slipped up with. If you want to exit stage left, conveniently, because I've expressed how stupid the notion is that they SHOULD TRUST THE FUCKING WEST IN THEIR BACK YARD then so be it. I wouldn't expect a Reaganite throwback to do much more than wave a fucking flag and keep looking strait ahead anyway

Let's check your theory. Because there is a possibility that the US could be lying to everyone and installing nukes instead of antimissile systems, let's assume that's what they're actually doing

That's probably why we offered to allow Russian the ability to inspect all the sites right? I'm sure we would bury the actual nukes with the Russians came and then put them back on the launchers when they left. How's your tinfoil hat fitting today? Got your binos trained on Area 51 today too?

Like the Russians don't have satellites. Please. Can you make weaker arguments?

Since you've clearly missed it, the POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT!!!!!!!! Damn you're thick!

 

[DavidS]

Please. If you are going to just make up facts to suit your argument, then I'm out. Have fun.

oh, you mean "make up facts" like "gosh, guy, why would russia react to American missiles in their back yard when WE WOULD DO THE SAME IF CUBA HAD RUSSIAN MISSILES?"




The fact is, YOU don't know what will be installed in those locations and Russia has even cause to be as suspicious as YOU would be in the little Cuba scenario you slipped up with. If you want to exit stage left, conveniently, because I've expressed how stupid the notion is that they SHOULD TRUST THE FUCKING WEST IN THEIR BACK YARD then so be it. I wouldn't expect a Reaganite throwback to do much more than wave a fucking flag and keep looking strait ahead anyway

Let's check your theory. Because there is a possibility that the US could be lying to everyone and installing nukes instead of antimissile systems, let's assume that's what they're actually doing

That's probably why we offered to allow Russian the ability to inspect all the sites right? I'm sure we would bury the actual nukes with the Russians came and then put them back on the launchers when they left. How's your tinfoil hat fitting today? Got your binos trained on Area 51 today too?

Like the Russians don't have satellites. Please. Can you make weaker arguments?

Since you've clearly missed it, the POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT!!!!!!!! Damn you're thick!

 

[Shogun]

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

oh SNAP!


Are US Nukes in Europe Secure?

The U.S. keeps an estimated 350 thermonuclear bombs in six NATO countries. In four of those — Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands — the weapons are stored at the host nation's air bases, where they are guarded by specially trained U.S. military personnel.

Are US Nukes in Europe Secure? - TIME


did.. someone say something... about.... MAKING UP FACTS???

 

[Shogun]

Please. If you are going to just make up facts to suit your argument, then I'm out. Have fun.

oh, you mean "make up facts" like "gosh, guy, why would russia react to American missiles in their back yard when WE WOULD DO THE SAME IF CUBA HAD RUSSIAN MISSILES?"




The fact is, YOU don't know what will be installed in those locations and Russia has even cause to be as suspicious as YOU would be in the little Cuba scenario you slipped up with. If you want to exit stage left, conveniently, because I've expressed how stupid the notion is that they SHOULD TRUST THE FUCKING WEST IN THEIR BACK YARD then so be it. I wouldn't expect a Reaganite throwback to do much more than wave a fucking flag and keep looking strait ahead anyway

Let's check your theory. Because there is a possibility that the US could be lying to everyone and installing nukes instead of antimissile systems, let's assume that's what they're actually doing

That's probably why we offered to allow Russian the ability to inspect all the sites right? I'm sure we would bury the actual nukes with the Russians came and then put them back on the launchers when they left. How's your tinfoil hat fitting today? Got your binos trained on Area 51 today too?

Like the Russians don't have satellites. Please. Can you make weaker arguments?

Since you've clearly missed it, the POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT!!!!!!!! Damn you're thick!

INSPECTIONS really are convincing, eh dude? I mean hell... it is FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE to switch out hardware after inspectors leave! Isn't THAT exactly what we say regarding IRAN?





hey dude... maybe you should rely more on evidence like I am rather than 20 year old tired fucking rhetoric that died with Reagan, eh?


But, please... why don't you NOW insist that the sole purpose was "POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT" after all this feigned outrage at their predictable reaction! Indeed, one of is THICK alright!





read any good TIME articles lately?

 

[Tech_Esq]

Russia is playing the same role with Iran that the Us is with israel. Lemme guess.. THEY are wrong while WE are righteous, right?

Hell, you think DavidS has never tried to validate the arms we sell israel with financial excuses?

The fact remains that if you play the game then you'd best expect the game to be played. Acting with manufactured outrage at easily predictable reactions really doesn't impress me.

You assume too much. It's a big game and a big stage. Everyone pursues their interests as they see it. Right and wrong doesn't much come in to it. Power usually wins unless it beats itself or fools itself.

The winners get to say what "right" was. That's the way it REALLY goes. You mistake me for some kind of "the US is always pure as the driven snow and we only do things for righteous purposes" kind of guy. I'm not. I'm a "real politick" kind of guy. We'll do what we do for our reasons. And I don't see a hell of a lot of reason to apologize for it. And, if someone sticks missiles in Cuba, we'll do what ever we do to react to that situation including making a bunch of public caterwauling about it just like Russia is. See how it works?

I see exactly how it works. And when YOU react in the exact same fashion to Cuban Missiles as Russia does with Polish missiles then be sure to make your little speech about the personal exclusivity of righteousness during our next instance of mutually assured destruction.


another reagan era piece of political jargon to hit our lexicon, no less.

I see how it works with you missile = nuke. Gun = Assault weapon.

Luckily big boys and girls don't think like that. They can actually distinguish one thing from another.

When was the first instance of mutually assured destruction? For that matter can you explain the following terms:
MIRV, throw weight, decapitation strike, triad, the effect of anti-ballistic missile systems on the balance of power, multi-polarity, bi-multi-polarity and penetrated processes of foreign polities?

 

[Tech_Esq]

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

oh SNAP!


Are US Nukes in Europe Secure?

The U.S. keeps an estimated 350 thermonuclear bombs in six NATO countries. In four of those — Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands — the weapons are stored at the host nation's air bases, where they are guarded by specially trained U.S. military personnel.

Are US Nukes in Europe Secure? - TIME


did.. someone say something... about.... MAKING UP FACTS???

bombs not missiles. We were talking about missiles not bombs, but yes I should have made it clear in that we were STILL talking about missiles.

 

[DavidS]

Dumbass. There aren't any nukes in Europe (Not ours anyway). So what the fuck are you talking about?

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

oh SNAP!


Are US Nukes in Europe Secure?

The U.S. keeps an estimated 350 thermonuclear bombs in six NATO countries. In four of those — Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands — the weapons are stored at the host nation's air bases, where they are guarded by specially trained U.S. military personnel.

Are US Nukes in Europe Secure? - TIME


did.. someone say something... about.... MAKING UP FACTS???

Actually no, no one said he was making up facts. But thanks for playing, asshole.

 

[Shogun]

You assume too much. It's a big game and a big stage. Everyone pursues their interests as they see it. Right and wrong doesn't much come in to it. Power usually wins unless it beats itself or fools itself.

The winners get to say what "right" was. That's the way it REALLY goes. You mistake me for some kind of "the US is always pure as the driven snow and we only do things for righteous purposes" kind of guy. I'm not. I'm a "real politick" kind of guy. We'll do what we do for our reasons. And I don't see a hell of a lot of reason to apologize for it. And, if someone sticks missiles in Cuba, we'll do what ever we do to react to that situation including making a bunch of public caterwauling about it just like Russia is. See how it works?

I see exactly how it works. And when YOU react in the exact same fashion to Cuban Missiles as Russia does with Polish missiles then be sure to make your little speech about the personal exclusivity of righteousness during our next instance of mutually assured destruction.


another reagan era piece of political jargon to hit our lexicon, no less.

I see how it works with you missile = nuke. Gun = Assault weapon.

Luckily big boys and girls don't think like that. They can actually distinguish one thing from another.

When was the first instance of mutually assured destruction? For that matter can you explain the following terms:
MIRV, throw weight, decapitation strike, triad, the effect of anti-ballistic missile systems on the balance of power, multi-polarity, bi-multi-polarity and penetrated processes of foreign polities?

I'll keep this short and sweet because we both know that you sound kind of silly after the TIME article I posted....





please, your tryst in jargon land may give jesse helms a boner but....

 

[Shogun]

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

oh SNAP!


Are US Nukes in Europe Secure?

The U.S. keeps an estimated 350 thermonuclear bombs in six NATO countries. In four of those — Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands — the weapons are stored at the host nation's air bases, where they are guarded by specially trained U.S. military personnel.

Are US Nukes in Europe Secure? - TIME


did.. someone say something... about.... MAKING UP FACTS???

Actually no, no one said he was making up facts. But thanks for playing, asshole.

......perrrhaps you should take a second to actually read the thread, ya dumb, fat jew.

 

[Tech_Esq]

oh, you mean "make up facts" like "gosh, guy, why would russia react to American missiles in their back yard when WE WOULD DO THE SAME IF CUBA HAD RUSSIAN MISSILES?"




The fact is, YOU don't know what will be installed in those locations and Russia has even cause to be as suspicious as YOU would be in the little Cuba scenario you slipped up with. If you want to exit stage left, conveniently, because I've expressed how stupid the notion is that they SHOULD TRUST THE FUCKING WEST IN THEIR BACK YARD then so be it. I wouldn't expect a Reaganite throwback to do much more than wave a fucking flag and keep looking strait ahead anyway

Let's check your theory. Because there is a possibility that the US could be lying to everyone and installing nukes instead of antimissile systems, let's assume that's what they're actually doing

That's probably why we offered to allow Russian the ability to inspect all the sites right? I'm sure we would bury the actual nukes with the Russians came and then put them back on the launchers when they left. How's your tinfoil hat fitting today? Got your binos trained on Area 51 today too?

Like the Russians don't have satellites. Please. Can you make weaker arguments?

Since you've clearly missed it, the POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT!!!!!!!! Damn you're thick!

INSPECTIONS really are convincing, eh dude? I mean hell... it is FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE to switch out hardware after inspectors leave! Isn't THAT exactly what we say regarding IRAN?





hey dude... maybe you should rely more on evidence like I am rather than 20 year old tired fucking rhetoric that died with Reagan, eh?


But, please... why don't you NOW insist that the sole purpose was "POINT OF THE EXERCISE WAS TO GET RUSSIA TO REACT" after all this feigned outrage at their predictable reaction! Indeed, one of is THICK alright!





read any good TIME articles lately?

What did I tell you about simplistic answers. Sole purpose? As if anything in foreign policy has a "sole purpose."

Yes, your youth makes you wise.

Hey strawman builder -- when was I outraged?

 

[Shogun]

Are you saying that the United States of America does not have one nuclear weapon stored in a European country? Do you really believe that?

oh SNAP!


Are US Nukes in Europe Secure?

The U.S. keeps an estimated 350 thermonuclear bombs in six NATO countries. In four of those — Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands — the weapons are stored at the host nation's air bases, where they are guarded by specially trained U.S. military personnel.

Are US Nukes in Europe Secure? - TIME


did.. someone say something... about.... MAKING UP FACTS???

bombs not missiles. We were talking about missiles not bombs, but yes I should have made it clear in that we were STILL talking about missiles.

yea dude.. because fucking WARHEADS CANT BE ADOPTED TO EITHER DELIVERY FORM.


wow.


for real.. just. WOW.