[quote="MaxFromRussia";p="357002"] 2000 Russian nuclear warheads = 2000 "New Orleans"

Make it 8000

__________________
O ΚΑΙΡΟC ΓΑΡ ΕΓΓΥC+

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

In the extremely unlikely event that a future Iran fires one of its precious few nuclear missiles directly into an area covered by a missile defense shield... the missile would be destroyed before there were any nuclear explosion. There would be no "nuclear splinters" falling into Russia, only radioactive material. Putting myself in your place -- given the prospect of having such material fall into the US vs. having Moscow or St. Petersburg destroyed, I think the decision would be an easy one. The death of dozens versus the death of millions.

It seems to me that the only reasonable reason for opposing the missile defense shield (from Russia's perspective) is that it limits your defensive capabilities.

St.Petersburg, the most European of Russian cities, is hardly representative of Russia in any meaningful way.

That is like me recomending you to visit NYC to get a feel for America. It's just silly.

__________________
"I have been made victorious through terror" ~ the profit mohammed (Bukhari 4:52:220)

The truth hurts, but not as bad as a being beheaded.

Did you mean `offensive` capabilities?

There is also a reasonable concern that in nullifying a nuclear threat..destabilising the concept of MAD...the risk of conventional warfare is increased.

__________________
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Marx (G.)

I guess that depends on who's at the reins.

You wouldn't want to fall victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this: "Never go in against a Sicilian, when *death* is on the line!" Hahahahahah.