2 ms·
Interesting. I draw the opposite conclusion. Seeing that nuclear weapons are the only realistic threat against the United States, I believe a majority of our mi
by causi 5y ago
Interesting. I draw the opposite conclusion. Seeing that nuclear weapons are the only realistic threat against the United States, I believe a majority of our military budget should be dedicated to the development and deployment of anti-missile defense systems, be they based on kinetic interception, lasers, or even nuclear interceptors.
- jessriedel 5y agoGreater US investment in strategic nuclear weapons defense is compatible with everything I said above. Whether thats a good idea depends on what equilibrium it drives the world military order to. If you propose adjustments to US policy, you can't pretend that the world response is fixed. There are strong but not irrefutable arguments that strategic nuke defense spending by the US just induces the same by Russia/China, but puts us in a new nuke equilibrium with less stability than the current MAD situation. The relative stability of those two scenarios can not be figured out by you or me thinking in our armchairs. It depends sensitively on the technological and economic details.