verbatim, don't you? Of course you do.
Russia and the US have had nukes pointed at each other for almost as long as the Cold War has been going on. It's never been a reason or a justification for either country to invade a 3rd country.
What do russia or China being "pals" with various Latin American countries have to do with anything? Russia's been "pals" with Cuba since 1959, and they're "pals" with various other Latin American countries as well. We've behaved abominably towards Cuba, but it is still an independent country with close ties to russia.
What do nukes have to do with this? Is this the "We have to give Putin everything he wants or he'll incinerate the world" hysteria? Or is it the "we were on the verge of putting nukes on Ukrainian territory pointed at russia, and they invaded just in time to stop us" conspiracy theory?
Did you know that when it became independent, Ukraine had the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world? And that it was the US president Bill Clinton who essentially forced them into agreeing to turn them all over to russia and join the Non-Proliferation Treaty? Do you think that's an indication that we now have the intention to place nukes there? Did you know that in return for giving up its nukes, the US, UK, and russia all signed an agreement, the Budapest Memorandum, which they believed to be a guarantee that their sovereignty and territorial integrity would be protected? Yes, russia agreed to respect their territorial integrity and never invade them. How's that working out?
And sorry but NATO's nukes aren't going anywhere. It would be utter insanity for NATO to unilaterally disarm under current conditions.
Noam and Cornell are either idiots or are active russian agents. It's not for me to say which.
In any event, your post is a mindlessly regurgitated word salad of russian talking points and I hope that you will try to better inform yourself about what's really going on.
= new reply since forum marked as read