ICBM's make all limited range missiles obsolete.

Strategically placed missiles are useless, just like the Jupiter missiles.

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Well back in the cold war Russia couldn't do it as the US would have likely countered with a proxy war to take the facility out.

Right after the cold war Russia was broke, and the US was piling aid money on Russia anyway.

Now there just isn't anything to gain, and Russia is still a bit strapped. Lets say Russia builds a big airbase in Cuba. What would they do with it?

The US however is getting a lot of use out of its bases abroad. Using them and our carriers to bring the hurt to Yugoslavia, Afganistan and Iraq.

They are also used to route humanitarian aid on occasion, or to serve as or support a peacekeeping force.

And finally some of them defend against possible invasion. And the US isn't looking to invade anybody in the Americas.

lol
Another political expert

__________________
Obama, Bob Gates, Colin Powel, Hillary Clinton and other war criminals from Bush administration… Yes, it's a change we can forget about, because do not forget, it was a candidate brought to you by a non democratic media, while any real candidate has been obscured by it.

You will not see any change until you unite for democratic media.

touché

Fair enough. Right now cash wise Russia has a positive income as opposed to the US debt situation. Mostly Russia is strapped for military capabilities just because they haven't been a profitable democracy for very long and are still rebuilding their strength. Right now their fleet is relatively small and weak, notably in the carriers and Amphibious Assault ships that would be relevant to supporting a base should it be threatened, such as if a coup overthrows the government and the new government wants those Migs for itself, or rebels seize the facility. Russia may not want to have a base under that uncertainty. But Russia is building.


Still I'm more inclined towards my earlier "no reason for it" points. They'd just have a base there that would annoy the Americans and do nothing with it.

Though down in South America there might be some use due to Venezuela getting pissy with it's neighbors in border disputes and supporting rebel groups and the like.

One other possibility is that Russia has plenty of places it wants to conquer right next door, and feels no need to dilute its forces.

They could only do so much damage. You're kind of overexxagerating their strength.

Lack of balls?

And yet they made a point.

__________________
Be thou faithful unto Death
And I will give thee a crown of Life

"The problem with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it's just they know so much that isn't so"
- Ronald Reagan

"A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger, is prepared for a Master and deserves one"
- Alexander Hamilton

Oh cruel fate, to be thusly boned. Ask not for whom the bone bones. It bones for thee.

The Jupiter missiles were scheduled to be scrapped anyways. They were obsolete and in the process of being replaced. The Russians got the short end of the stick in the Cuban Missile Crisis.

__________________
sputterman: "Aiding the enemy? If the truth aids the enemy then we are in the wrong war."

So, what nuclear equipped bases do we have that we are surrounding Russia with? We're putting missile intercepters in Poland and Czech, not nukes. Russia putting nukes in Venezauela or Cuba would be an escalation, not a counter to what we're doing. We may have troops moving into Poland and Romania and the like, but NATO will not go to war with Russia in anything resembling an offensive war. NATO is a participatory alliance, they all have to agree on something for it to happen. I guarantee that Poland, Romania, and Norway would refuse to go to war with Russia, unless they were attacked first.

A real retaliation for our bases would be for the Russians to put their own ABM system in Venezuela and Cuba and maybe base bombers or troops there. Either way, their stuff won't get used.

__________________
sputterman: "Aiding the enemy? If the truth aids the enemy then we are in the wrong war."

Who says they cant?

Russia officially has my permission to put nukes wherever they dаmn well please (Please pass it along next time you see them). Happy?


Probably because they are afraid of being economically isolated. But it's their decision, not mine. Russia is a democracy and can do whatever it wants with it's nukes.



Which is why these retarded threats are so funny.

Then you have the Russian users on here insisting that Russia is not scared of the US. Well, all these threats (empty as they are) sure make it LOOK like they are afraid of the US, heh heh

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Hey. Does our embargo on Cuba still include weapons? For a while there at least it was our position to intercept any ships bringing weapons into Cuba.

That was during the Quaranteen(sp?) during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US and several other nations maintain a voluntary trade embargo with Cuba, but they are the exception not the rule.

__________________
sputterman: "Aiding the enemy? If the truth aids the enemy then we are in the wrong war."