4 ms·
Where are you getting your sources from here? The Cuban Missile Crisis occurred in the context of the early 1960s whereby bombers were the primary method of del
by corimaith 2y ago
Where are you getting your sources from here? The Cuban Missile Crisis occurred in the context of the early 1960s whereby bombers were the primary method of delivery. Since the late 1960s, the ICBM is the bedrock of the MAD strategy, and the need of a second-strike capability via SSBNs and hidden silos after absorbing a nuclear attack.
>In any case, even in a MAD setting every side will be constantly trying to manoeuver to a position of advantage.
There is no real "advantage" over having an extra few minutes or not. Russia is also building some sort of nuclear tsunami weapon, the US does not care. Because the strategy remains unchanged from threat of ICBMs. Frankly speaking, if you want to talk about what actually is a disadvantage for Russia right now, it's this war. If NATO actually invaded, they'd caught with their pants down. Hell, the US might even successfully ensure a first strike given they moved their air defences away.
The fact that Putin started this war even when knowing this should tell you that he dosen't actually view NATO as a threat. And they're not, from the Houthis, to Iran to Hamas, everbody can tell the US has no stomach for a war. This is not the result of US aggression, it is the result of US unassertiveness
- woooooo 2y agoWe just funded and managed two 20 year wars across the planet from our borders, one in a landlocked country. Russia couldn't move a tank column down a highway at the beginning of this war. Putin is definitely crushing us at manly and assertive displays, though.
- Teever 2y agoMaybe that says more about the military capabilities of the people that America fought vs that of the people Russia is fighting?
- woooooo 2y agoThat tank column was defeated by mud and lack of supply, opposing forces were a distant third. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Kyiv_convoy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Kyiv_convoy
- Teever 2y agoWould you say that this particular episode is representative of the entire Russian military during this conflict?
- woooooo 2y agoPretty much? They have logistics problems 20 miles from their borders, we had excellent logistics for 20 years in frickin Afghanistan. They built Taco Bell restaurants on the bases. These are entirely different leagues of capability.
- Teever 2y agoDid the Taliban ever take out one of those taco bells with an American supplied ATACMS?
- woooooo 2y agoIrrelevant compared to logistics. Russians are winning now because they've figured out logistics within 50 miles of their borders compared to earlier in the war. Still doesn't mean they can project globally, and everyone knows.
- Teever 2y agoMaybe a big part of why the Russians are having issues with logistics is due to those ATACMs and such.
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago>> If NATO actually invaded, they'd caught with their pants down. The problem with that is that NATO is next door to Russia now. Nuclear deterrence doesn't work that well when it means nuking your foot. Seen another way, Russia doesn't need ICBMs to reach London, Paris, Berlin... But, really, try to think more carefully of what you're discussing: nuclear war. The threat to the existence of human civilisation from that is too big for macho politics and "we're stronger than them" braggadocio. As Chomsky pointed out once, and as aggravating as this is, that means letting assholes get away with murder on the international scene; which means not just Russia, but also the US, Israel, China, and who knows who else, in time.