4 ms·
India has had the ability to reach LEO and beyond for a while now. So bringing down a nuke anywhere on the planet wouldn't be that difficult for them. That goes
by nirav72 2mo ago
India has had the ability to reach LEO and beyond for a while now. So bringing down a nuke anywhere on the planet wouldn't be that difficult for them. That goes for any country that has LEO launch capabilities. Of course miniaturization of the nuclear payload is another matter.
- walrus01 2mo agoLiquid fueled launch vehicles aren't storable/able to be made ready at a moment's notice, unlike solids. Liquid fueled historical artifact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM-65_Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM-65_Atlas There's a reason all modern silo based (and submarine) ICBMs are solids.
- stickfigure 2mo ago> There's a reason all modern silo based (and submarine) ICBMs are solids. Believe it or not, here in 2026, this is incorrect! Those crazy Russians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-29RMU_Sineva https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-29RMU_Sineva https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-29RMU2_Lajner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-29RMU2_Lajner UDMH + nitrogen tetroxide. I would not want to be a Russian submariner. For all sorts of reasons.
- laughing_man 2mo agoTo be fair, while these missiles are still in service they're obsolete and are slated for retirement the coming decade.
- stickfigure 2mo agoThe most recent started service in 2014. They may in fact be obsolete but not because they are old by soviet standards.
- dmurray 2mo agoDo you need to be able to strike at a moment's notice? For a proper MAD-based nuclear deterrence, yes, you want to be able to launch a massive retaliation while your enemies' missiles are still in the air. Submarine-launched missiles also require stable storage. But having first-strike capabilities, the ability to wipe out any city in the world in return for a few weeks' planning, seems like something militaries would find valuable.