4 ms·
I keep seeing this being repeated, but the state of nuclear deterrence is very different than during the Cuban missile crisis. The US, UK, France, and Russia al
by jakeinspace 5y ago
I keep seeing this being repeated, but the state of nuclear deterrence is very different than during the Cuban missile crisis. The US, UK, France, and Russia all have enough nuclear-armed subs sitting just outside of enemy waters to destroy every major target on both sides. The US doesn’t have nuclear weapons in Poland, nor does it need them. Russia cannot stop thousands of ICBMs and hundreds of sub-launched closer range nukes, and neither can the US.
- rmk 5y agoYou are talking about the military aspects. The political aspects matter too, and sometimes much more than the military aspects. Do you think the US would be content to let Russia place missiles on Cuban soil today? Why is China cagey about the US deploying THAAD on South Korean soil?
- jakeinspace 5y agoNot sure if those were rhetorical questions but of course you’re certainly correct. The difference between those situations (at least Cuba) and the nuclear situation in Europe is that Moscow is already very much in striking distance of British and French nukes, and vice versa. Nobody wants the scary optics of accepting further encroachment of nuclear weapons closer to thei borders, even though it has less tactical value than it did 60 years ago.