3 ms·
Just for completeness' sake: it's not clear to me the world needed any more submarines, nuclear or not, French or US. I feel like that aspect is conveniently o
by black_puppydog 5y ago
Just for completeness' sake: it's not clear to me the world needed any more submarines, nuclear or not, French or US.
I feel like that aspect is conveniently overlooked in any discussion of the matter and I don't like that.
- mam2 5y agoPeace was brought faster by two atomic bombs than by 200 years of diplomacy. Im pretty fine with more submarines
- sofixa 5y agoOf course. Nuclear powered submarines ( with ballistic missiles more so than attack ones, but still) are a very powerful deterrent. An enemy can't know where they are, and is afraid of them, and has to spend considerable resources to counter them.
- laurent92 5y agoThere are still more planes in the ocean than submarines: About 480 if I remember. But oceans are huge. What would be the correct ratio? Besides, any nation which doesn’t have control of its airspace, oceans and now even higher and higher in space, is doomed to be controlled by those who have the higher control.