|
Willie Tomg posted:This is why a tactical use on an invading force--almost certainly American unless designer drugs and too many Clancy novels have broken your brain--concerns me more than strategic use. We know what happens in strategic exchanges. It fuckin sucks I'm in the same boat; I am not that afraid of an insensate nuclear war (although just by his personality and erratic positions alone, Trump has probably increased the odds from "extremely unlikely" to "really unlikely"). I'm afraid of the nuclear taboo being broken and low-yield nukes becoming just another tool in the arsenal. Breaking the norms around nuclear devices can have really really bad consequences down the line. However, "some general will just shoot him in the face" is plain wishful thinking. The US system has been built from the ground up since the end of WW2 so that the US President has sole discretion over the decision (the SecDef merely confirms that the President gave the order), and is surrounded by an apparatus whose only job is to guarantee he can execute that decision once he's made it. Nuclear weapons were centralized and civilianized to the POTUS and the DOE for a good reason, because the US military was full of nuts who would've gladly used tactical nuclear weapons. Now it's backfiring though. I don't blame for the wishful thinking, though, because the US starting a nuclear war for the regular person is like worrying about dying in a car crash. The latter is way more likely to kill you but you still drive. Sulphagnist fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Jan 22, 2017 |
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 03:09 |
|