3 ms·
It would be suicidal for a nuclear armed state to "at scale" launch such weapons at another nuclear armed state. Yeah, they could have conventional weapon paylo
by jjk166 1y ago
It would be suicidal for a nuclear armed state to "at scale" launch such weapons at another nuclear armed state. Yeah, they could have conventional weapon payloads, but the target nation isn't going to sit around and find out. You launch what looks like an all-out nuclear first strike, you're going to receive a retaliatory nuclear strike. In a drawn out conflict perhaps you'd have a slow escalation of bigger and bigger conventional strikes and eventually reach the point of such an attack without triggering a nuclear response, but that gives time for the populace to adapt to the new normal, not to mention hardening targets. The only scenario where just one day the continental US gets hit and then we're done is the nuclear first strike scenario, the threat of which the population has been living with for decades.
Realistically, total war between nuclear weapon states is unlikely to happen under the current geopolitical paradigm. Proxy conflicts trying to push nations to collapse from internal stress will remain the real arena of great powers until such time that an effective counter to full scale nuclear attacks are not only developed but trusted. In such a world, shooting down long range, highly maneuverable missiles with advanced countermeasures isn't just possible, it's routine.
- maxglute 1y ago>slow escalation That's probably how it plays out if it plays out (also imo unlikely). But also mere existence of capabilities like PRC PGS will force parties to recalibrate response matrix. It would also be true to say ANY US strike on PRC mainland via any delivery platform, boats/planes/subs at scale will invite immediate retaliatory MAD response... after all essentially every US delivery platform is dual capable, i.e. can be nuclear tipped -> warhead ambiguity problem. How would PRC know otherwise? Except rational actors (maybe lol expectations) from both sides knows adversary capable of conventional homeland strikes will have to adjust response accordingly. This means in world where PRC can strike CONUS at scale, US likely has to settle for launch on confirmation, just like PRC has to deal with US striking mainland at scale. That's why assured second strike via triad exists (really SSGN for US, rocketforce TELs in tunnels for PRC). But until shooting actually starts, GD doesn't need to be trusted, it just needs to exist to placate domestic audience or confuse adversaries.
- jjk166 1y agoI don't think the US striking the PRC mainland, at least outside of an immediate conflict zone like the shores of the Taiwan straight, is plausible either. It's exactly the same arithmetic. Why would the US or China reduce their readiness to respond to an attack because their adversary has become more capable? The whole point of a nuclear deterrence is to deter attack. If anything, making it clear that a large scale missile attack will be interpreted as a nuclear first strike is more beneficial when there are a bunch of missiles the adversary is seriously considering launching at you. It is in both countries best interests to keep any potential conflict limited with clearly delineated theaters of war.