3 ms·

>One nuke and Israel will just be gone, completely. Iran is probably capable of this, or close. It's not clear that they could actually deliver a nuclear weapo

>One nuke and Israel will just be gone, completely. Iran is probably capable of this, or close. It's not clear that they could actually deliver a nuclear weapon, of course. And certainly not all the way to America.

TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago
It doesn't have to be on a warhead but smuggled somehow. It would certainly be traced back to them so I don't think they will ever target America directly.
- whimsicalism 6y ago
  ? Target anyone at all with a nuke and you are getting invaded by an international coalition at minimum and quite likely nuked yourself.
  - TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago
    Maybe, maybe not. Once you have shown you have the capabilities it's a different story, but then again you don't have to directly do it, just leak it to your "friendly" neighborhood terrorist group and let them take the blame. Maybe Iran is a different story but what if a dirty bomb was made from India's or China's nuclear materials for example, would an international coalition invade them? I doubt it.
- everdrive 6y ago
  While this is possible, it's clear that this would be a deterrence first. The point would be that minor strikes or political actions would not have a much higher cost. For example, North Korea does not want to nuke the US. They want to possess nukes such that US actions are more constrained. It's a very unfortunate incentive.
  - TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago
    While I agree that the main point is deterrence, the rules have changed in the last 50 year and it's not always a country vs country. Israel created their nuclear program to deter an all out war that could lead to Israel destruction but today Israel isn't fighting their direct neighbors in a conventional warfare. Nukes in the hands of North Korea are bad no matter what, don't underestimate a mad man and their cult followings.
matthewdgreen 6y ago
Not yet, but eventually they will. North Korea has intercontinental missiles. This is 1950s technology: if a country wants it badly enough they'll get it.

TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago

It doesn't have to be on a warhead but smuggled somehow. It would certainly be traced back to them so I don't think they will ever target America directly.

whimsicalism 6y ago
? Target anyone at all with a nuke and you are getting invaded by an international coalition at minimum and quite likely nuked yourself.
- TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago
  Maybe, maybe not. Once you have shown you have the capabilities it's a different story, but then again you don't have to directly do it, just leak it to your "friendly" neighborhood terrorist group and let them take the blame. Maybe Iran is a different story but what if a dirty bomb was made from India's or China's nuclear materials for example, would an international coalition invade them? I doubt it.
everdrive 6y ago
While this is possible, it's clear that this would be a deterrence first. The point would be that minor strikes or political actions would not have a much higher cost. For example, North Korea does not want to nuke the US. They want to possess nukes such that US actions are more constrained. It's a very unfortunate incentive.
- TheGuyWhoCodes 6y ago
  While I agree that the main point is deterrence, the rules have changed in the last 50 year and it's not always a country vs country. Israel created their nuclear program to deter an all out war that could lead to Israel destruction but today Israel isn't fighting their direct neighbors in a conventional warfare. Nukes in the hands of North Korea are bad no matter what, don't underestimate a mad man and their cult followings.

matthewdgreen 6y ago

Not yet, but eventually they will. North Korea has intercontinental missiles. This is 1950s technology: if a country wants it badly enough they'll get it.