Similar yes, I do not disagree with the decision to place BOMARC's in Canada, however useless they were. It meant that nuclear detonations would be taking place over lightly populated NWT and Yukon territories instead of our major population centres, and that was a good thing. However cancelling the Arrow was a huge mistake as most would agree. Bombers are still a threat today, about half a century after Dief called decided that fighters were obsolete.
i think that bush should put its missiles so that the ones shot down fall over "lightly populated" parts of his own country.
to put his missiles so they shoot down the enemy ones over another country and call it "not my responsibility" if they damage a city is BULLSHIT pure and simple.
to say "put my missiles in your country or else your cities will have ICBMs raining on them" is even more bullshit. (pardon my slight exageration)
i think a better solution is a missile with an EMP thingie so that the electronics get fucked up and the missile won't detonate. that way it will just fall harmlessly to the ground and then it can be recovered by the military and researched. (BTW, nukes of today won't detonate on impact, they're designed that way.)
here's a novel idea
why doesn't the U.S. just be nice to other countries so they won't want to blow them up?
can't these people remember back to grade one when the most important thing you learned was be nice to the other kids and share your toys. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if Dubya couldn't pass grade one...
unfortunately skid, it is far too late for that. now, that is just wishful thinking.