Ronald Reagan, and nuclear War

[bob10]

They were told to expect 80 million American casualties.

Ronald Reagan and Nuclear War: The SIOP Briefing and IVY League 82

[bob10]

Jimmy Carter's controversial nuclear targeting directive.

Jimmy Carter's Controversial Nuclear Targeting Directive PD-59 Declassified

[Tombie]

Paranoia at its finest... amazing it never got worse.

[bob10]

There is every indication it may.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...weet.html?_r=0

And Vladimir said.....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-cal...101800687.html

[DiscoMick]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

[bob10]

The definition of catch 22.

https://youtu.be/msPO_vXaCTw

[Ausfree]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

That's all very well in the hands of reasonable people, but what if somebody like North Korea decides to up the ante. The big worry is, if a nuclear weapon falls into the hands of a terrorist who don't care about life.

[Tombie]

Mick.

MAD is Mutually Assured Destruction. Not deterrent.

[bob10]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

Read President Carters nuclear targeting directive.. Everything depends on which rat bag is in charge. Putin and Trump.Good luck with that.

[DiscoMick]

Mick.

MAD is Mutually Assured Destruction. Not deterrent.

That's right. MAD is supposed to be a deterrent.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app