3 ms·
No need for missiles or 1000s of warheads or anti-missiles. 4 five megatones bombs, which is pretty standard, smuggled in DIY kits through the mexican border,
by w1nst0nsm1th 4y ago
No need for missiles or 1000s of warheads or anti-missiles.
4 five megatones bombs, which is pretty standard, smuggled in DIY kits through the mexican border, and assembled and detonated in the 4 centers of power of the US, namely Washington (political center), NY (financial center), LA (media center), and SF (technological hub) and the US go back to its founding fathers era or at best to its civil war.
And if you can't trace where the nukes come from, who will you nuke back ? The whole world ? The MAD doctrine assume you know who is your ennemy...
And it's not the numbers of victims that matters. It's the command centers.
You could elaborate something similar to every other nuclear powers.
- gpderetta 4y agoAny retaliation would probably hit all potential enemies. In fact this would probably be the case even if the attacker is known.
- chipsa 4y agoMAD doctrine doesn't exist. No state actually assumes that it should be mutual. That's psychotic. The actual doctrine of the US is Assured Destruction: use a WMD against us, and we will assuredly destroy you. This is not necessarily on a time limit. Such a proposed attack would only harden the resolve the attacked power to make sure the "self lit parking lot" exists.
- waffleiron 4y agoSure, but two states with assured destruction doctrines makes MAD, you ought to destroy the other because they will destroy you. Why use a single WMD against the US when the final result (assured destruction) is the same as when you use a lots of WMDs.
- chipsa 4y agoMaybe. But my point is that "MAD" isn't a doctrine. It's a game-theoretic idea of the outcome of a nuclear war, and it assumes pre-conditions that aren't necessarily true, especially with regard to our opponents.