Would you support war with Russia is defense of countries such as Georgia IF the planned US missile shield was upgraded to repel a Russian nuclear attack?

[Elrond]

This question is different to the prevous thread because it takes into the consideration the possible future capacity that the US missile shield could have, because of this war with Russia would not mean a nuclear holocaust and therefore the results of this poll are likely to be different for the older poll. Therefore could moderators allow this different topic to be dissuccsed rather than closing the thread and merging it with the old thread.

If the following things happened:

a) The planned US shield was equipped with the technology to shoot down ALL Russian missiles and had enough missiles to shoot down ALL Russian nuclear weapons (with enough for misses) and the current US missile defense system was equiped to such a standard (in otherwords if all of Europe AND all of the US + Canada were covered by impregnable missile shields).

b) Russia threatened one of its Democratic neighbors using the the excuse that it was protecting its citizens and then decided to invade.

Would you support Military action by the US and its allies in defense of the country?

[Kiljan Arslan]

if the country wasn't apart of NATO not sure, because I wouldn't no if Europe would fallow us, and we would need them backing us, plus the Missie Shield in Europe would be of little use against Russia, if we wanted one to to be of use we'd need to build it in Canada.

[Elrond]

if the country wasn't apart of NATO not sure, because I wouldn't no if Europe would fallow us, and we would need them backing us, plus the Missie Shield in Europe would be of little use against Russia, if we wanted one to to be of use we'd need to build it in Canada.

There is a missile shield in Alaska and California of about the same standard of the one planned for Europe.

[Vladimir Lenin]

This question is different to the prevous thread because it takes into the consideration the possible future capacity that the US missile shield could have, because of this war with Russia would not mean a nuclear holocaust and therefore the results of this poll are likely to be different for the older poll. Therefore could moderators allow this different topic to be dissuccsed rather than closing the thread and merging it with the old thread.

If the following things happened:

a) The planned US shield was equipped with the technology to shoot down ALL Russian missiles and had enough missiles to shoot down ALL Russian nuclear weapons (with enough for misses).

b) Russia threatened one of its Democratic neighbors using the the excuse that it was protecting its citizens and then decided to invade.

Would you support Military action by the US and its allies in defense of the country?

Good god yes.

[Thanatos]

No, because I don't give two about Georgia.

[Kiljan Arslan]

Yes yet te missles to hit the Midwest and the North East would mostly fly over Canada.

[Elrond]

Yes yet te missles to hit the Midwest and the North East would mostly fly over Canada.

Considering that the radar is one state and the missiles in another its a fair guess that it covers the gap in between. Obviously the poll would be conditional on all of North America and Europe being covered by good enough missile shields.

[Problem Sleuth]

As mentioned before, the nukes would pass through Canada, and seeing as I live in the northern Midwest, no. I generally don't like being blown up over some insignificant Baltic country.

[poloport]

As mentioned before, the nukes would pass through Canada, and seeing as I live in the northern Midwest, no. I generally don't like being blown up over some insignificant Baltic country.

it isnt a baltic country

[Vladimir Lenin]

As mentioned before, the nukes would pass through Canada, and seeing as I live in the northern Midwest, no. I generally don't like being blown up over some insignificant Baltic country.

What the hell would they want to nuke in the Midwest? :hmmm:

Chicago, St. Paul & Minneapolis, maybe Omaha but other then that.....

[Elrond]

As mentioned before, the nukes would pass through Canada, and seeing as I live in the northern Midwest, no. I generally don't like being blown up over some insignificant Baltic country.

The underlying assumption of the poll is that the missile shield system would protect every part of the NATO countries. So if one or more radar stations and missile bases need to be built to make that so then thats part of the poll.

[blank]

As mentioned before, the nukes would pass through Canada, and seeing as I live in the northern Midwest, no. I generally don't like being blown up over some insignificant Baltic country.

No, because I don't give two about Georgia.

Putin loves people like you.

Isolationism FTW.

[MaximiIian]

No, because I don't give two about Georgia.

I approve of this service and/or product.

[Osceola]

No, because I don't give two about Georgia.

QFmotheringT.

[Babur]

This question is different to the prevous thread because it takes into the consideration the possible future capacity that the US missile shield could have, because of this war with Russia would not mean a nuclear holocaust and therefore the results of this poll are likely to be different for the older poll. Therefore could moderators allow this different topic to be dissuccsed rather than closing the thread and merging it with the old thread.

If the following things happened:

a) The planned US shield was equipped with the technology to shoot down ALL Russian missiles and had enough missiles to shoot down ALL Russian nuclear weapons (with enough for misses).

b) Russia threatened one of its Democratic neighbors using the the excuse that it was protecting its citizens and then decided to invade.

Would you support Military action by the US and its allies in defense of the country?

Reminds me of the plot of Ghost Recon 1 vaguely

But anyway I think NATO could smash Russia in a conventional war.Since that was what it was created for right? .

[Vladimir Lenin]

Reminds me of the plot of Ghost Recon 1 vaguely

But anyway I think NATO could smash Russia in a conventional war.Since that was what it was created for right? .

Yes, sadly it appears Russia wants NATO to resort to it's old cold war duties....

At least we've got Eastern Europe this time!

[Oglethorpe1983]

Yes,

But it is a conditional yes: If the US missile defense shield in Eastern Europe could be made "inpregnible" and we could have the same assurance for NORAD for attacks over the arctic circle, AND if Russia were to make continued aggressive actions towards addition eastern european nations: Poland, Ukraine, ect...then Yes

However it needs to be realized a regional war with Russia would escalte very quickly into a global conflict...WW3

[Kiljan Arslan]

I personally think that everyone should have a missle shield, the ICBM is in my veiw the most cowardly and barbaric weapons.

[Ishoss]

No thanks, they could overrun Norway way to fast if they wanted to. And if they used the "Scorched land" tactics while retreating back to Russia, we'd be screwed.

Unless Russia attacks a NATO member (Not future member, not good relations. A member.), I won't support a war against them.

[CaesarBR]

No, I wouldn't support...and the suggestion of the thread is lame, by the way...

I personally think that everyone should have a missle shield, the ICBM is in my veiw the most cowardly and barbaric weapons.

I agree completely...