Difference between revisions of "Talk:START II"
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Also, the US would prefer that a renewal of the treaty also include [[China]], which further complicates and extends any talks should there be a renewal. | Also, the US would prefer that a renewal of the treaty also include [[China]], which further complicates and extends any talks should there be a renewal. | ||
| − | Without a decision on the US side (there has been no response yet to [[Putin]]'s proposal a week ago) it means a full blown [[arms race]] and [[New Cold War]] that could last a half century, again, complete with all the attendant [[economic]] consequences) for example, expensive [[weapon]]s that don't work when needed, as the last weapons that were developed and paid for by the [[taxpayer]]s in the last [[Cold War]] have proven ineffective in [[Ukraine]], etc. | + | Without a decision on the US side (there has been no response yet to [[Putin]]'s proposal a week ago) it means a full blown [[arms race]] and [[New Cold War]] that could last a half century, again, complete with all the attendant [[economic]] consequences) for example, expensive [[weapon]]s that don't work when needed, as the last weapons that were developed and paid for by the [[taxpayer]]s in the last [[Cold War]] have proven ineffective in [[Ukraine]], etc. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Zelensky Must Go!'']]</sup> 02:12, October 15, 2025 (EDT) |
Revision as of 06:14, October 15, 2025
The Tomahoax controversy is tied up with the renewal of the START II treaty slated to expire early Feb 2026.
The US wants to test out its 40-year-old technology against the modern S-400 and S-500.
Also, the US would prefer that a renewal of the treaty also include China, which further complicates and extends any talks should there be a renewal.
Without a decision on the US side (there has been no response yet to Putin's proposal a week ago) it means a full blown arms race and New Cold War that could last a half century, again, complete with all the attendant economic consequences) for example, expensive weapons that don't work when needed, as the last weapons that were developed and paid for by the taxpayers in the last Cold War have proven ineffective in Ukraine, etc. RobSZelensky Must Go! 02:12, October 15, 2025 (EDT)