87% favor it? Quite large but this has been building for some time now. Together with continued technological advances, the follow on sentence explains it mostly (people never liked MAD as a doctrine) but leaves out the most important part: most discussions in the US don't present missile defense as a panacea to shield against an assault by a full-on nuclear strike by Russia or China but rather accidental launches or actions by a country like North Korea, for example, the range of whose missiles continues to increase and whose leadership seems a bit unattractive and unpredictable. There may also another sobering possible factor in this: the US public may be making a market-like judgment and just might be discounting the future of nonproliferation. Not much positive has been said about this in recent years particularly with Pakistan already nuclear and unstable, and Iran straining for the golden ring.

Russia's concerns a valid regarding the scaling up issue - in theory. But, realistically, the engineering to construct a missile defense shield against the kind of strike that Russia or potentially China could mount assumes technology not in existence or likely to exist any time soon.

The irony in the arithmetic you cite is that limited missile defense ought to _strengthen_ not weaken nonproliferation efforts by reducing the value of small ballistic missile programs, like those that a North Korea or Iran might develop: Why bear the expense and hassle with sanctions and counter proliferation programs when the end result will be a system with no credibility?

Well Kyle, looks like your article is on point, but apparently more than missiles are in play. AP has a story announcing the future placement of Patriot batteries in Poland:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hdNtXPW9-1UZEmhgLC5VZ3dDa25wD92I94T81


But the really interesting thing to note is this part of the story:

---------------------------------------------------
Speaking in an interview televised on news channel TVN24, Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the United States had agreed to help augment Poland's defenses with Patriot missiles in exchange for placing 10 missile defense interceptors in the eastern European country.

"We have crossed the Rubicon," he said, referring to U.S. consent to meet Poland's demands.

Tusk said the agreement was initialed by negotiators late Thursday in Warsaw and includes a "mutual commitment" between the two nations — beyond that of NATO — to come to each other's assistance in case of danger.

"Poland and the Poles do not want to be in alliances in which assistance comes at some point later — it is no good when assistance comes to dead people. Poland wants to be in alliances where assistance comes in the very first hours of — knock on wood — any possible conflict," Tusk said.
---------------------------------------------------

The devil is in the details, of course, but a bilateral security agreement like this is a potentially big shoe to drop. The ABM system under consideration was no threat to Russia as you've skeptically noted. However, you do realize what these agreements could mean, right? I'm sure the Russian Federation's general staff does. Putin growled at the mere prospect of just an ABM system in Poland. What now?

Exactly right! This is a shot across a couple bows - including NATO, should anyone miss it. The US has been hinting at, and thinking about this for sometime now, and most thought it a distant possibility. Well, it sure looks a decision has been made. History might show that Tusk did not exaggerate in his reference to the Rubicon.

(Quiz time, everyone. Q: What is the minimum distance between the Russian and Polish border? A: 0 miles)

Again, depending on the details, redeployment out Iraq and Germany may bear watching.

I don't know how pissed off other eastern countries will be, maybe less than one might think. Just the fact that the US is willing to go this far, might be reassuring. Besides, Poland really, really seems to have wanted it, and I'm not sure that others in that eastern European grouping are as committed.

I'll bet the Russians didn't really think that this would happen in response to Georgia. Looks like Georgia is ushering a "new world". Thank you Mr. Putin. I sure hope everyone likes what they see.

That's correct, the agreement was initialed (wasn't Kyoto initialed by the US?) and is subject to the ratification at least in Poland. Nothing yet in stone with those "niggling" details yet to be made public. But Tusk's description of it is remarkable.

The very fact that this has occurred shows the willingness of Washington to play diplomatic hardball, and serves to underscore - to everyone - their somewhat indistinct, if not muted, threats of further diplomatic consequences.

Looks like some diplomats will have to put any summer vacation plans on hold.