3 ms·
That defeats the purpose of MAD and makes the use of nuclear weapons more likely. If the response to a nuclear attack is devastating then there is less chance t
by kosievdmerwe 8y ago
That defeats the purpose of MAD and makes the use of nuclear weapons more likely. If the response to a nuclear attack is devastating then there is less chance that one will attack in the first place.
I firmly believe nukes are the reason we haven't had world war 3 yet. If no nukes existed the USA and the USSR would have gone at it in the 60s/70s.
- quacked 8y agoI agree. I have no background in military strategy so I try not to feel too comfortable in making conclusions about warfare tactics, but it seems like the reason we haven't had a classic major land war between two superpowers since WWII seems to be because of nuclear weapons.
- dingaling 8y agoMAD ( countervalue ) was discontinued as a policy under President Carter when Poseidon & Minuteman III made counterforce viable. The Soviets made a similar transition, moving away from city-crushing 25MT unitary warheards to much smaller silo-busting MIRVs. MAD did its job through the 60s but faded away as technology improved.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]