28 ms·
No sane military would introduce such a lag. Furthermore I think your concerns are overblown. After all, something far more "potentially disastrous" happened in
by Jach 14y ago
No sane military would introduce such a lag. Furthermore I think your concerns are overblown. After all, something far more "potentially disastrous" happened in 1983 at a high point in Soviet/US tensions, and fortunately the guy in charge of retaliation launching had the common sense to reason a war wouldn't be started with one (or in his case, 5) missiles. http://lesswrong.com/lw/jq/926_is_petrov_day/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/jq/926_is_petrov_day/
- twoodfin 14y agoAnother problem with a "long fuse" approach: It offers either antagonist a (seemingly) low-cost path of escalation (say, "just" deploying the ICBMs to their silos) during a crisis. This not only necessitates a comparable response, it is subject to being interpreted as more belligerent than intended. After you've gone a few rounds of this, you're right back where we are now, launch keys always ready to turn, except this time you're riding the momentum of mounting brinksmanship.