4 ms·
To be fair, we could probably have both if national rail was a priority. The interstate system was built over decades during periods of high military spending a
by knz 10y ago
To be fair, we could probably have both if national rail was a priority. The interstate system was built over decades during periods of high military spending and several conflicts.
Modernization of our nuclear capability isn't necessary a bad thing (if you assume MAD doctrine is effective and that the nuclear triad is a key piece of this).
- halomru 10y agoInterstate spending can easily be viewed as defense spending. After all it's called the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways" and was partly inspired by Nazi Germany's Autobahn system that was instrumental for fast troop movement.
- knz 10y agoIndeed. I think you could make the argument that it was a better investment than something like the F-35 though - at least the interstate system provides continuous economic benefit etc.
- ced 10y agoHow many nuclear weapons do you really need for MAD to be effective?
- rangibaby 10y agoThe magic number seems to be about 100. Enough to destroy important cities and military targets with some spares to reduce the chance of your arsenal being eliminated by a first strike.