The Blue Board

Here you go:

If you think the START treaty was good policy, then you are a retard beyond repair. I don't even need to go any further.

You're right, we should simply build up a huge nuclear stockpile and use it as a deterrent against other countries. That never led to the Cold War or anything.

Pretty easy to post ITT IMO.

I bet you think a "nuke free world" is realistic too, huh?

No, I think it's an ideal that should be striven towards. Personally, I think Reagan went about nuclear deterrence in the best way possible - instead of building up everyone's offensive arsenals, distribute the SDI plans globally while constantly negotiating for the reduction of nuclear arsenals.

You're welcome! It's nice to be appreciated, isn't it?

I was asking you, but I guess neither of us knows. It'll forever remain a mystery.

I'm sorry. Here's a +1 to help.

Limited the number of deployed nuclear warheads to 1,550, limited the number of total deployed/non-deployed ICBM launchers to 800, and limited the number of ICBMs, SLBMs, and bombers with nuclear capabilities to 700.

Regardless of the practical dismantling implications, there were limitations placed on both countries. Capping the amount of allowable weaponry certainly doesn't constitute a failure to "require the Russians to agree to do much of anything at all."

Have to agree with the bammer here. The clerk sounds like a big dildo with all the self aggrandizing. Please save your posts and come back to read them when you grow up, clerk. I think you'll be embarrassed.