>mutually assured destruction is not a thing.
:^)
Mutually assured destruction is not a thing
Austin Baker
Other urls found in this thread:
Wyatt Anderson
We use NUTS now, dummy.
Kayden Adams
WW2 nukes don't really compare to modern ones, though.
Samuel Baker
MAD is only a thing if all sides believe it is a thing. The soviets didnt believe in MAD. They believed after the initital nuclear strikes they would be in a better place to fight a traditional war than the west would be.
Cooper Morales
then why did they pretend to take MAD seriously and never launch their nukes?
Ian Nelson
They were fucking delusional. Our nuke codes were literally
00000000
so our operators could spam the passwords and nuke the shit out of those commie fucks.
Benjamin Butler
What happens if you live in the middle of nowhere though?
Anthony Lee
>What happens if you live in the middle of nowhere though?
>what happens when you live in the Colorado desert and New York/Washington/Las Vegas is wiped off the face of the earth
Dominic Kelly
The middle of nowhere is where all the nukes are going to land.
Jeremiah Morris
>>what happens when you live in the Colorado desert and New York/Washington/Las Vegas is wiped off the face of the earth
I would still be alive, what's your point?
Ayden Fisher
They didn't want a destructive war, MAD notwithstanding.
Joshua Bennett
Would be pretty comfy.
Henry Rodriguez
You would die in the radiation and nuclear winter that would follow. The US has enough nukes to nuke everyone on the Earth several times over.
Xavier Rodriguez
>You would die in the radiation and nuclear winter that would follow. The US has enough nukes to nuke everyone on the Earth several times over.
stop repeating this stale meme
Lincoln Nelson
>The US has enough nukes to nuke everyone on the Earth several times over.
WE
Jaxson Powell
a. Soviet strategy was only for retaliatory nuclear response
b. why start the war if it can be avoided
Grayson Turner
Not him, but how is this a meme?
Brandon Hill
It isn't, you can't nuke everything
Who's going to spare nukes on the Congo? Or Chad?
Nobody that's who
Bentley Phillips
Citation: your ass
Jaxson Barnes
>source: the Fallout series
Gabriel Watson
iirc it's not a thing anymore because there's a belief that a limited nuclear use could then be followed by de-escalation. Still, a nuke seems like a decent thing to have to prevent others from thinking they could easily attack you.
Christian Hall
>MAD is not a thing because after Americans and Russians wipe themselves out Africans will colonize the ruins.
Yeah sure.
Oliver Hernandez
If you keep saying bad words I will delete your post
Liam Long
>US
~7k nukes
>Russia
~7k nukes
>not enough to wipe the entire human race out of existence
>at least not back to the stone age
Levi Bell
Not even 7K combined and not all would be launched
Bentley Thompson
Citation: your ass.
Noah Ramirez
>Eurasia and North America would wipe each other out.
>Central Asians, South Americans, Africans, and Southeast Asians will inherit the earth.
Luke Barnes
And your citation for 7K each?
Dominic Butler
All the worlds current information.
Kevin Ortiz
No, the Soviets hoped that a large conventional war between the super powers wouldn't necessarily turn into a nuclear one. On the other hand, it was the strategy of the NATO forces to make the Soviets believe that they would retaliate with nukes in case of a conventional attack because they were inferior conventionally.
James Lee
>"I truly believe that one does not light-heartedly attack people who are able to kill 80 million Russians, even if one can kill 800 million French, that is if there were 800 million French."
I don't know, but Charles de Gaulle really believed in the MAD.