So Boerd

The Sword of Damocles: Cold War NRP

UK, reporting in.

To Lund ap Lunds [ Early Middle Ages NRP ]

For what purpose? My 15 year old son married a 14 year old.

The Sword of Damocles: Cold War NRP

Dibs on UK.

World in Revolution: 1861

^

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

mdk said
Most of the leaders in the world are opposing any policy that makes it easier for anybody to nuke anybody, and I think that's valid.

The US nuclear umbrella is illusory. I agree Japan actually having missiles would mark a drastic reversal of US policy towards the region, but getting them as close as possible such that they can get substantial numbers of weapons can only be good.

To Lund ap Lunds [ Early Middle Ages NRP ]

Not if we can avoid it.

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

This is why I support a Japanese nuclear weapon, btw. Very easy choice for them, who are about to be subjugated. They can have lots in a few months' time anyway, so Hirohito pt 2 could build a few hundred before anyone could stop him.

To Lund ap Lunds [ Early Middle Ages NRP ]

Sadko said
i vote to lynch cale

Seconded

Question to all Chinese/British/Americans/French/Russians/Israelis/Indians/Pakistanis

mdk said
That's the article's presumption of the American/NATO reaction. Not mine. Piontkovsky argues that Americans are too compassionate to win a fight against Russia. Taylor (the author of the linked critique) also argues that American leaders would be unable to build consent for a prolonged engagement because we don't care enough about the former Bloc. The two don't really gel, but that doesn't stop Taylor from taking both sides. No wait, Latvian. I mean same thing. But Latvian.

I see your point. What about if/when China gets conventional superiority?

Signups: World in Revolution: 1900

Transvaal on Map?