Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, but only technically. What matters is the advanced weapons system each of these countries has on its territory. Think Aegis Ashore and the likes of that. Otherwise, they're just empty land (from a military viewpoint).



If we free ourselves of the bounds of what is technically true, then we can justify nearly anything. I'm not sure it's a productive line of reasoning.


What are you trying to say here? Technically true is still true, so we should take it into account when making a decision.


That we should take into account that NATO is already 'at their doorstep', regardless of which weapon systems are where, since they can be deployed anywhere later.



I'm not sure what part you are asking me to explain to you? They seem relatively self-explanatory.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: