Yes, I know its not really that feasible.
Edit: If a nation does not fear retalliation due to this protection. Then the second strike capability is dramatically weakened. Thus making nuclear weapons a real option for the country available again
Yes, I know its not really that feasible.
Edit: If a nation does not fear retalliation due to this protection. Then the second strike capability is dramatically weakened. Thus making nuclear weapons a real option for the country available again
This is gambling not feasible. It only takes one.
What? Maybe if you’re Lichtenstein.
But if a large country like the US could guarantee that it would only take a single nuke in return for a lunching a first strike, that’s a pretty good incentive and would definitely undermine MAD completely.
Are you serious? You know how many warheads exist? Its going to be more than 10 they call it MAD for a good reason. No defense system can block a sky full of missiles.
Yes and so is every major nuclear armed country. That’s why they are developing new delivery systems to counter the more modern and proficient anti-missile systems.
Sure, for now a few hundred warheads on cold-war era missiles will still do the trick, but they might not in 20 years. That’s what makes it a continues arms race (which is exactly what the treaty was trying to prevent).
We won’t have a civilization in 20 years. Think about tomorrow with these short term oriented goals.
That’s news to me.
But it’s not really a topic that leads it self to short term goals, most weapon development projects take decades by itself already.