Share this comment
I would argue that ICBMs do not complicate an adversarie's targeting because Russia has enough that they don't have to worry too much about prioritizing and China is well on its way to getting there: theguardian.com/world/2…
I will also add that be it 5 missiles or 500, if they get launched our strategic nuclear force's whole rational for…
I would argue that ICBMs do not complicate an adversarie's targeting because Russia has enough that they don't have to worry too much about prioritizing and China is well on its way to getting there: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/03/china-increasing-nuclear-arsenal-much-faster-than-was-thought-pentagon-says
I will also add that be it 5 missiles or 500, if they get launched our strategic nuclear force's whole rational for existing has failed- deterrence, mutually assured destruction did not work.
Simple math proves your wrong - hitting 450 hardened targets is far harder and more complicated than hitting 5 soft targets.
If someone launches just a few nuclear weapons that doesn't actually mean strategic deterrence failed. Strategic deterrence is about deterring an existential threat to America, not to trying to pretend that it deters every kind of nuclear attack. The fact that it has since 1945 is a nice bonus but no one should be dumb enough to think that a small nuclear war isn't possible. That kind of folly is what led us to getting rid of almost all of our tactical nuclear weapons after the cold war ended only to try to get back some of them now.
I am sure our European allies were thrilled with the idea of a tactical nuclear war since it would take place mainly on their soil. The countries with the most tac nukes woudl be spared most of the effects.
It is true that even with a nuclear umbrella you might get a little wet. But they didn't object strongly and even allowed for the basing of the weapons there --- including equipping their own plans to drop them.
They knew what the alternative was and accepted it.
"As only a fool believes in limited nuclear war or the “only works in the faculty lounge” concept of “tactical nukes” - any NATO use of nukes in Europe has a greater than 75% chance of escalating in to the entire northern hemisphere nuking itself in to making the next Cold War between Brazil and Nigeria."
CDR Salamander
https://cdrsalamander.substack.com/p/how-weak-is-the-strongest-nation?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=247761&post_id=129617972&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
Sadly Putin has shown himself to be a fool so who knows what he believes. Escalate to de-escalate is a published Russian doctrine.