Tepid

 Undoubtedly, there was an element of lazyness in letting

the mutual assured destruction argument stand as the 'resolution'

to the proliferation of nuclear and possibly other extreme weapons:

so terrible that one would not want these on self, so  one wouldn't

use them on others. And the hope was that, over time, such weapons

would be phased out as mankind 'matured'. Well, we are paying for

that squeamishness now. 

Because - on the arguments face of it - what is the current conflict about.

It is about what side are various countries on within the deadly equation.

Many Easter European countries have chosen to join the Atlantic countries, the

fun countries with a lunatic press and rampant consumerism (and the most weapons). 

And they were allowed to do so moving the demarcation line East on the EuroAsian 

map. And now Russia argues it is aggrieved, while its economic prospects narrowing 

dangerously. Putting it mildly...

So now Russia has supersonic missiles, China has supersonics; even modest little

North Korea has them, engaging in a wild flury of tests only recently. Interestingly,

the US does not...yet. Theirs are meant to come online in 2023. Asleep at the

switch, are we...? Could such restraint actually prove to be...prudent?

Morning coffee is tepid where I live, if anyone is wondering.