Bit of both. Not being able to throw nukes has restricted the F35 sales in NATO, which has . . traditionally . . depended on nukes to slow down the momentum of

Bit of both. Not being able to throw nukes has restricted the F35 sales in NATO, which has . . traditionally . . depended on nukes to slow down the momentum of a Warsaw Pact breakthrough. The idea is that an armored breakthrough is likely to be concentrated, and if you nuke the tip of the spear right at the place the spear is connected to the shaft, you can make an instant no-man's land that will buy you time as the spearhead runs out of gas/water/food/support. The teensy problem is that this kicks off, in simulations anyway, stroke-counterstroke-countercounterstroke nukes over a waaaaaaay-too-small area, and the tactical situation just turns into soup. In newer simulations, the disruptions to C&C - from the residual ionization - is so bad that it's actual literal static, for long periods of time, no one anywhere knows what's going on anywhere else. Which still counts as no-man's-land? Just a bit more long term. "Mission very accomplished, but with qualifications" is a pretty good functional summary of nuclear explosives in general.