Nuke their conventional forces. They're coming by sea, right? Here, let's be hyper-paranoid and hang on to the drones and about half of the Air Force. It's stil

Nuke their conventional forces. They're coming by sea, right? Here, let's be hyper-paranoid and hang on to the drones and about half of the Air Force. It's still more than enough to wipe out any aggressive force before it can make landfall. This isn't the Middle Ages where pansy nobles played at war and had dinner together in between having their peasants butcher each other. If the US and Russia were to go to war it wouldn't be an honorable clash and if our tanks beat their tanks and our planes beat their planes well gosh darnit guess they give up Siberia. Here's a thought experiment: if India didn't have a strong conventional force in Kashmir and just threatened to use nukes on Pakistan if they invaded, would Pakistan call them on it? And if the Indians did toss a nuke, would Pakistan really respond and invite a few dozen others? Of course it plays better with the population to have war once in a while. Gives the illusion of change, drives a narrative and so on. But I doubt most major decision makers are crazy enough to risk prolonged nuclear exchange. The lesson I take from that video is maybe slightly different: Why go to war with the Soviets at all? Would my life as a British/US citizen be better with Gorbachev/the USSR in charge or would it be better after a prolonged nuclear exchange or would it be better after a decade of conventional World War 3? Freedom and independence are overrated and not being dead, starving and at war are underrated by modern societies to a staggering extent.