Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Hey, Whatever Floats Your Boat

NATO actually has the right response to Russia's threats regarding our planned missile defenses (well, "planned" before President Obama asked Medvedev for some "space" on the issue):

The deployment by the Kremlin of tactical weapons to protect against a planned U.S.-led missile shield in Europe would be to squander funds that could be used to improve living standards in Russia, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Monday.

“I have to say that it would be a complete waste of money to deploy offensive weapons against an artificial enemy – an enemy that doesn’t exist in the real world,” Rasmussen said in a video link-up from NATO headquarters in Brussels. “This money would be much better spent on economic and social development.”

Rasmussen’s comments come less than a week after outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said Moscow was preparing a host of countermeasures to tackle NATO missile defense, including forward deployments of tactical Iskander missiles in its Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad.

Like I wrote:

The Russians threaten to bolster missile launch detection and weapons to counter our missile defenses. If it increases their trust in us, I say go for it, dudes, Knock yourselves the eff out and build up those capabilities. Since the missile defenses are not pointed at Russia, can't stop a Russian attack, and are already vulnerable to existing Russian weapons, by all means achieve the capability to bounce the missile defense rubble if it helps you sleep at night.

Russia has a lot of ground to make up for after a generation of their military rotting away. Why discourage the Russians from wasting money if they want to persist in thinking of us as the enemy? Would we really rather they bolster their conventional capabilities instead?

Make my day, Moscow. Counter that dangerous threat to Mother Russia. We deserve it. And you'll feel good, apparently.