4 ms·
No chance. A nuclear strike on Iran won't achieve anything that a large number of conventional strikes would.
by tristanj 7mo ago
No chance. A nuclear strike on Iran won't achieve anything that a large number of conventional strikes would.
- bkishan 7mo agoWouldn't*
- aschla 7mo agoYou're assuming the current president operates on rationale. He simply would love to be the guy who uses a tactical nuke.
- mlrtime 7mo agoHow much would you wager? It's easy to to say what you're saying because it's popular. If you watch action and not social media bs, the probability is close to 0%.
- Ntrails 7mo agoMy real question is not whether it would achieve anything meaningful, but what would be the side effects of such a strike on allies in the region. I don't have a remotely decent mental model of fallout etc from modern nuclear weapons - my assumptions are they're still toxic enough to be a bloody terrible idea anywhere near someone you like.
- hdivider 7mo agoI think the main concern would be escalation, e.g. Netanyahu feeling emboldened to use his weapons too. And of course Putin, to try to shock Ukrainian forces and population (good luck). Alliances might get reshuffled as everyone realizes they need to reassess their nuclear defense and deterrence. It would fundamentally change the nature of modern warfare, not for the better. Let us hope this never happens.
- majani 7mo agoThe shock and awe from a nuclear strike is unmatched
- oblio 7mo agoYeah, that "shock and awe" would probably destroy any remaining US alliances.