[cryptonector]

First off, it may not be quite that simple. They may need detector tech that they lack. Secondly, development of these dead-hand weapons systems may be easier for them or more appealing for whatever reasons (perhaps cultural).

But yes, you'd think it'd be better to double decision times than to deploy dead-hands.

Also, the U.S. could easily share early warning satellite technology with Russia. This might be a lot easier if relations weren't already so frosty.

I believe Obama's sanctions against Russia were unwise, and ratcheted up tensions unnecessarily. Moreover, Congress' subsequent affirmation of those sanctions and removal of the President's ability to remove them further ratcheted up tensions. And all of this over a very partisan domestic feud about supposed Russian interference in the 2016 election, in a country that regularly interferes in other countries' elections. Is this really worth it for Democrats? Is it really worth it for all those very many Republicans that voted for that silly bill (probably so they could head off Democrat claims of being in cahoots with Russia)?? Almost certainly not. But such is the degree of bitter, uncivil partisanship in the United States today. President Trump doesn't even have the ability to negotiate a thaw in relations given the current statutory situation -- a treaty could be used, sure, but there's no reason to think that the Senate would welcome it anymore than it was willing to let the President be able to reduce sanctions by himself (as would have been the usual case).

My guess is it will take Republicans having a very good 2018, or failing that, a very good 2020, before tensions can decrease. Alternatively, Democrats would have to sweep in 2020 and somehow allow themselves to un-blame Russia for 2016, which just doesn't seem likely, not given their rhetoric so far.

[dragonwriter]

> And all of this over a very partisan domestic feud about supposed Russian interference in the 2016 election

The majority party in the Congress that adopted the sanctions is the same as the one of the President who allegedly benefitted from the interference. And national security officials in that same Presidential administration have described the Russian interference as something that happened in 2016 and can be expected to continue.

Blaming the sanctions on a domestic “partisan feud” is incorrect.

[cryptonector]

My impression is that Republicans voted for that bill because they were afraid that voting no would be used against them as proof that they were in cahoots with the Russians. I think that's at least a tenable interpretation.

[pdonis]

> the U.S. could easily share early warning satellite technology with Russia

I strongly suspect that the US already has "shared" such technology with Russia, in the sense that they have obtained it from spies. There are other possible reasons why Russia might not choose to use such technology even if it has it (see my other post upthread).