top | item 44778515

(no title)

pclowes | 7 months ago

Is he wrong?

This has historically been very true. The nuclear deterrent has significantly decreased the probability of civilian or armed forces dying as a result of conflict globally.

discuss

order

arp242|7 months ago

It's not my impression that an extremely aggressive attitude helps safety, no. There is a reason for "they will attack us everywhere" and quite some part of that is the "wrath of America" coming down on them some time in the recent past (either directly or via proxy, like Israel).

Obviously having a military is a necessity and there is some truth to what he is saying, but it's also superficial and short-sighted. It's a strategy that works great right up the moment your back is turned or you're not paying attention for a minute. There's always going to be nutjobs out there doing nutjob things, but at times the US has almost gone out of their way to create enemies.

Ozzie_osman|7 months ago

Strength is a deterrent, no doubt. But there's a difference between having strength, and wanting your so-called enemies to go to bed scared and wake up scared.

dzhiurgis|7 months ago

Never been punched in the face I see?

agent_turtle|7 months ago

The nuclear deterrent works because of MAD. If only one nation had the capacity for nuclear weapons, there's a strong case to be made that we'd be living in a totalitarian world state or at the very least vassals to the dominant state.

altcognito|7 months ago

The US had a monopoly on nuclear weapons for nearly four years.

2OEH8eoCRo0|7 months ago

Is it worth it? Like 70 million people died in WWII but an estimated 5 billion will die in a full nuclear exchange. That's like 70 world wars worth of people.

tonetegeatinst|7 months ago

I think this is a reference that if you want peach, one must prepare for war.

That includes offensive and defensive options, and being able to show you can stand up to others when it comes to other nations that have other views and moral beliefs.

agent_turtle|7 months ago

You can do that without creating a single unaccountable entity housing everyone's data. In fact, it is a weakness to have a single point of failure.

thefz|6 months ago

Was the nuclear deterrent a tool that could be used outside of war to spy on basically anyone on earth?