> You could probably make do with submarine, ship, and airplane based nuclear weapons? So instead of the enemy nuking farm fields in North Dakota, they shoot m

> You could probably make do with submarine, ship, and airplane based nuclear weapons? So instead of the enemy nuking farm fields in North Dakota, they shoot more nukes at heavily-populated cities? The article takes a bizarrely myopic view, with charts of fallout patterns that show only the land based silos they're complaining about getting nuked, as if removing them would remove the risk of fallout. If only we could be so lucky.