4 ms·

> Why do you need the other 18,000 bombs? Second-wave strategic targets ( surviving silos, airfields, ports and C3 facilities ) Tactical targets ( tank format

> Why do you need the other 18,000 bombs? Second-wave strategic targets ( surviving silos, airfields, ports and C3 facilities ) Tactical targets ( tank formations , POL depots, troop assembly areas, aviation FOBs ) Naval targets ( submarines, surface vessels, sonar installations ) Mobility targets ( bridges, valleys, tunnels ) Plus accounting for failed weapons, losses en route, missed targets...

tremon 6y ago
If you have made so many enemies that you need 18,000 nuclear bombs to feel safe, I question your attitude to life.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  As others have said - the primary reason is that you need 1+ nukes to take out the other side's launch sites, and the other side knows this so they spread the siloses across their whole territory - so now you need 1+ nukes for every silo they have (or suspect they have), and they need 1+ nukes for every silo you have (or suspect you have), and this is a positive feedback loop.
  - littlestymaar 6y ago
    By the time your nukes get to the silos, they will most likely be empty already though.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      Which is the reason you want to have more nukes than they have silos - to be able to hit all of them at once in a surprise attack (also called "first strike").
      - littlestymaar 6y ago
        Which won't save you against their SSBN… Granted, they have much less warheads in submarines than in silos, but that's still far enough to obliterate every city above 100.000 inhabitant in your country.
        TeMPOraL 6y ago
        Indeed, which is why submarines are the linchpin of modern MAD. But they weren't always present; the buildup of nuclear arsenal started when the options were limited to ICBMs and strategic bombers.
        varjag 6y ago
        Efficiency of submarine fleets were always hard to calculate, based largely on guesses about the adversary's true anti-submarine capabilities.
- chasd00 6y ago
  i don't see any real reasons, i bet lunch the main idea was to be able to credibly publish a bar graph showing your count larger than that of your enemies.

tremon 6y ago

If you have made so many enemies that you need 18,000 nuclear bombs to feel safe, I question your attitude to life.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
As others have said - the primary reason is that you need 1+ nukes to take out the other side's launch sites, and the other side knows this so they spread the siloses across their whole territory - so now you need 1+ nukes for every silo they have (or suspect they have), and they need 1+ nukes for every silo you have (or suspect you have), and this is a positive feedback loop.
- littlestymaar 6y ago
  By the time your nukes get to the silos, they will most likely be empty already though.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    Which is the reason you want to have more nukes than they have silos - to be able to hit all of them at once in a surprise attack (also called "first strike").
    - littlestymaar 6y ago
      Which won't save you against their SSBN… Granted, they have much less warheads in submarines than in silos, but that's still far enough to obliterate every city above 100.000 inhabitant in your country.
      - TeMPOraL 6y ago
        Indeed, which is why submarines are the linchpin of modern MAD. But they weren't always present; the buildup of nuclear arsenal started when the options were limited to ICBMs and strategic bombers.
      - varjag 6y ago
        Efficiency of submarine fleets were always hard to calculate, based largely on guesses about the adversary's true anti-submarine capabilities.
chasd00 6y ago
i don't see any real reasons, i bet lunch the main idea was to be able to credibly publish a bar graph showing your count larger than that of your enemies.