Nuclear triad aside, there’s the fact that the Arctic is more than 1000 miles away from the nearest US land (about 1700 miles away from Montana, 3000 miles away from Texas), that Siberia is already roughly as close.
Well, there’s Alaska, but yes, part of Russia is only ~55 miles away from Alaska, so the overall point stands that Russia having a greater presence in the Arctic doesn’t change things very much.
And of course, the fact the Arctic is made of, well, ice, that melts more and more as the climate warms, and thus not the best place to build a missile base on.
That’s not what is being proposed—it is building more bases in ports on the land where the water doesn’t freeze as much because of climate change.
Well, there’s Alaska, but yes, part of Russia is only ~55 miles away from Alaska, so the overall point stands that Russia having a greater presence in the Arctic doesn’t change things very much.
That’s not what is being proposed—it is building more bases in ports on the land where the water doesn’t freeze as much because of climate change.