Again, the issue is about not putting the President in a position where the only choice is to respond with a full launch or nothing after only being hit with 5 small nukes. That is the stability that the ICBMs provide - 450 hardened targets that have to be destroyed.
Without our 450 stabilizing ICBMs we could be attacked by only 5 small w…
Again, the issue is about not putting the President in a position where the only choice is to respond with a full launch or nothing after only being hit with 5 small nukes. That is the stability that the ICBMs provide - 450 hardened targets that have to be destroyed.
Without our 450 stabilizing ICBMs we could be attacked by only 5 small warheads and the only surviving element of our nuclear deterrent would be our at-sea SSBNs. Those SSBNs would have no spare parts and no repair crews. The only choice would be to launch a full retaliatory strike while we still have them or to let them slowly wither away and die on the vine.
Again, the issue is about not putting the President in a position where the only choice is to respond with a full launch or nothing after only being hit with 5 small nukes. That is the stability that the ICBMs provide - 450 hardened targets that have to be destroyed.
Without our 450 stabilizing ICBMs we could be attacked by only 5 small warheads and the only surviving element of our nuclear deterrent would be our at-sea SSBNs. Those SSBNs would have no spare parts and no repair crews. The only choice would be to launch a full retaliatory strike while we still have them or to let them slowly wither away and die on the vine.