4 ms·
If they were scared NATO was about to preemptively attack them, they probably wouldn't be moving air defense missiles out of Russia (including as far away as St
by matthewdgreen 4y ago
If they were scared NATO was about to preemptively attack them, they probably wouldn't be moving air defense missiles out of Russia (including as far away as St. Petersburg) [1] to move them to Ukraine.
But if you really want to worry about this, you don't need to consider the current war in Ukraine. You could look at this article from 2017 that describes a long-term plan to equip the U.S. submarine missile fleet with "superfuze" warheads that can accurately destroy hardened missile silos, which completely changes the strategic balance against Russia, in a way that might make things more dangerous for everyone [2].
[1] https://bnn-news.com/russia-moves-missiles-from-st-petersburg-to-ukraine-238614 https://bnn-news.com/russia-moves-missiles-from-st-petersbur...
[2] https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/ https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-moderni...
- morpheos137 4y agoConventional air defense missiles don't amount to much in case of nuclear war.
- SimbaOnSteroids 4y agoIn this case, hasn't NATO all but said their response to a nuclear escalation would be an overwhelming conventional strike.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- euroderf 4y agoPetraeus said it this week, probably with the blessing of ex-colleagues still in government. Yes the appropriate response is to respond with overwhelming conventional force, being careful not to threaten strategic assets that might be misinterpreted as a decapitation/pre-emptive strategic strike that requires a hair-trigger response.