Open Letter to The Federalist, an Online Magazine

Why doesn't the Federalist warn the public about how much the USA has DISARMED??!!
We are in fact INVITING Russian Attack. Actually,even with our much-reduced retaliatory arsenal, the fear of it would still deter Russia from attacking, except for one thing: Russia has built/deployed thousands of ABMs(AntiBallistic Missiles).
This explains why Russia is no longer afraid of our threat to retaliate after Russian Attack.
The Kremlin knows it can shoot down all our submarine-launched missile warheads with Russian ABMs.

The whole reason or rationale behind the much praised ABM Treaty which bans ABMs was that by having ABMs,Russia would think it could do the "impossible" - win nuclear war !! (by intercepting our incoming warheads, of course.)

But its NOT Russian ABMs (and the radar stations that would direct them up to the incoming US missile warheads) alone that makes the Kremlin cocky.
Its America's disarming that is all-important.
You see, Russia's ABM system could only handle a very limited number of targets. Like a juggler can only juggle so many balls.
 Russia's ABMs were always considered inadequate to the task of shooting down all or most of our sub-launched warheads - as long as we had so many of them.
The trouble is that Russia tricked us into drastically disarming by ending the Cold War.
 But more convincing than that, the Kremlin withdrew its tanks and troops from Eastern Europe.
That decieved even the skeptics in the West into thinking that Russia had given up its designs on Western Europe.
FBI chief William Webster (once also CIA head) wrote that by the early 1990s, Russia had taken "IRREVERSIBLE" steps toward democracy.
And so he gave his endorsement to America's opening up to Russia.
 Boy, how premature was that??!!
What a colossal mistake !!

Putin has shown that giving up some of the trappings of Communism doesnt equal giving up the essence of it: the one party state where all three parts of the government work as one:
The executive branch, the judiciary, the legislature.
There are no checks and balances.
The continued existence of the infamous KGB, under a different name, of course, shows that the evil Kremlin of the past is alive and well even today.

My point is this: if they went thru all the changes of the late 1980s just to get the USA to disarm, doesnt that imply the Kremlin plans on bombing America eventually ??!!
 For our disarming does not really benefit Russia - except in the event of a war, ie, Russian Attack.
Then the size of our retaliatory arsenal becomes crucial.
It makes the difference between Russia getting destroyed along with us or else winning the war by escaping our wrath.

When we had 39 boomer subs, many more than Russia's ABMs
could possibly handle, that didn't pose a threat to Russia.
 For our subs were all dormant, so to speak.
So peacetime Russia didn't really benefit by our cutting back to just the 12 subs that are deployed at present.

In closing let me say, the New START Treaty of 2010 is now in full effect.It now brings us down BELOW the number of warheads that Russia can shoot down. (Which is what the Kremlin has been working toward all along.)

Try to wrap your mind around THIS:
We have a total of 1,120 warheads on the missiles on the 8 subs we have at sea.
Russia has enough ABMs to shoot down 1,300 warheads.
So 1120 warheads minus 1,300 warheads(that Russia can shoot down) - you can see our arsenal adds up to less than zero !!
Shouldn't the Federalist be concerned enuff to inform the public of this grave danger ??!!