4 ms·
Another way to think about it though is without nukes there’d be nothing stopping NATO and Russia blowing the crap out of each other. That might not actually be
by jonplackett 2y ago
Another way to think about it though is without nukes there’d be nothing stopping NATO and Russia blowing the crap out of each other. That might not actually be better.
- ceejayoz 2y agoIf we ignore nibbling up bits of various sovereign nations while we look away and hope it stops, sure. Russia isn’t gonna stop with Ukraine just like they didn’t with Georgia and Moldova.
- lostlogin 2y agoNATO has completely undermined itself by watching Russia attack its neighbours and responding so weakly. What’s the point of a nuclear deterrent if your key strategy is going to be appeasement?
- petre 2y agoDid you read up about MAD and how computers evolved because the US was calculating what to nuke in the USSR in the event of a nuclear strike? The point of nuclear deterrent is to have it, not to use it. If one has too much of it they'll go bankrupt like the USSR. None and they'll get attacked or invaded. That's why nobody attacks North Korea and Iran mainly uses proxies to attack Israel.
- lostlogin 2y agoThat’s a bit simplistic. Plenty of countries have no nuclear weapons and aren’t attacked. The USSR didn’t fall because it had too many nuclear weapons. Plenty of nuclear armed countries have been attacked or invaded.