4 ms·

> "What would be the response to a nuclear power using one of these in combat? Escalation? Retaliation in kind? The damage to the surrounding environment could

by JackCh 8y ago

> "What would be the response to a nuclear power using one of these in combat? Escalation? Retaliation in kind? The damage to the surrounding environment could be small, especially if used to target submarines and ships." Look up "Escalate to De-Escalate." The apparent Russian nuclear doctrine involves small-scale nuclear devices (escalation) used in a regional capacity. Their theory, supposedly, is that if only a small nuclear weapon is used in a limited capacity against a military target, a full-scale nuclear response against civilian populations (aka nuclear Armageddon) would be completely unreasonable and consequently the other side would choose to back down (de-escalation). Now, whether or not Russia actually believes this or merely wants America to believe that Russia believes this is something of an open question. It could be the case that Russia wouldn't actually dare put Escalate to De-Escalate into practice, but merely claim they think it's a good idea as part of their deterrent strategy.

duxup 8y ago
I believe a few times the US has also alluded to low yeild strikes as a possible action to take to against rouge states if they felt a nuclear strike against an ally or the us was about to happen. At least before the things deteriorated between the US and Russia, Russia was silent in response. I suspect both sides are pretty pragmatic as far as a strike on regarding non NATO or non Russian targets goes, at least in terms of weighing the outcome rather than going full MAD... or even responding at all. Granted the US scenarios IIRC were hypothetical posed by reporters (or off the record policy talk) involving N. Korea and Iran and they were obviously military targets and the goal was prevent their use of nukes. Facing a nightmare scenery I suspect both nations expect the other would act to defend their people, and while not approve, wouldn't feel the need to respond with military action. Those situations seem tailor made to a limited smaller scale nuclear strikes.

by JackCh 8y ago

duxup 8y ago

I believe a few times the US has also alluded to low yeild strikes as a possible action to take to against rouge states if they felt a nuclear strike against an ally or the us was about to happen. At least before the things deteriorated between the US and Russia, Russia was silent in response. I suspect both sides are pretty pragmatic as far as a strike on regarding non NATO or non Russian targets goes, at least in terms of weighing the outcome rather than going full MAD... or even responding at all. Granted the US scenarios IIRC were hypothetical posed by reporters (or off the record policy talk) involving N. Korea and Iran and they were obviously military targets and the goal was prevent their use of nukes. Facing a nightmare scenery I suspect both nations expect the other would act to defend their people, and while not approve, wouldn't feel the need to respond with military action. Those situations seem tailor made to a limited smaller scale nuclear strikes.