Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PanzerKommander t1_j5gfe3g wrote

Reply to comment by sticky_symbols in Anyway things go downhill? by [deleted]

  1. You give nukes way more credit then they deserve.

  2. The nuclear weapons are pointing at each other, the goal is to knock out the other guys capabilities without killing his civilian population (you need them alive to be hostages).

  3. You can have a large war between major powers without it going nuclear, as long as the goal of the war isn't to dismantle each other.

Source: I was an Air Force Miniteman Operator

6

sticky_symbols t1_j5goljf wrote

I respectfully am going with the opinions of those who have studied the effects of fallout and nuclear winter.

Yes we could have a large war without a nuclear exchange. That does not seem likely.

6

YobaiYamete t1_j5iwmqw wrote

> you need them alive to be hostage

This is the big flaw in your argument. You are assuming two rational countries are having a friendly saber rattling thermonuclear exchange.

I can assure you, 100% assure you, that if Kim Jong Un was launching nukes at the US and thought he could get away with it, he would absolutely be targeting every large population center he could

2