The Missiles Beneath START Notice

This is an interesting discussion of the benefits and problems with the INF treaty between Russia and America that limits land-based theater missiles.

I did note that problem of potentially unrestrained theater missiles in the New START negotiations but didn't think that Russia could really afford to expand their theater nuclear arsenal too much. So I figured British, French, and Chinese nukes offset the Russian edge over America there.

Although more recently I've begun to wonder if Russia is emphasizing shorter-range nuclear missiles because they have a reliability problem with their far more complicated long-range intercontinental missiles.

It is food for thought on the value of INF, if Russia can be brought into compliance. The author makes a strong case that some form of an INF treaty is in our advantage. On the assumption that it doesn't include sea-based missiles.

And it makes me wonder if the existence of a Chinese theater missile arsenal justifies building American land-based theater missiles if we can use sea-based missiles.

Could we really just deploy theater missiles on American soil from Alaska to the western Pacific? Isn't Guam getting crowded enough as a target-rich environment for China?

Or would we have to ask allies to allow us to deploy such missiles on their territory, inviting protests that weaken our alliances, perhaps stoked by Russia or China?