by dontworrybehappy » Wed May 08, 2013 6:22 pm
If you have citizens still alive after a nuclear exchange, you won. The more you can get your enemy to disarm and reduce its stockpile, the higher the chance of you winning. Its pretty simple. You want the fewest nuclear warheads impacting your land and the most impacting theirs. It definitely helps when liberals in the white house want to reduce our stockpile, thus reducing the chance that we would come out ahead in a nuclear exchange. The good thing is....we have anti-missile defenses and could wipe out a bunch of Russias old cold-war era stuff before it ever made landfall.
Mutually assured destruction has worked wonders for 6 decades. But it must be MUTUAL to work. If one side disarms to the point where the other knows they could survive an exchange, then the cold war turns hot again and MAD goes out the window, which could result in a MORE dangerous world.
We don't have the volume of warheads people think we do.
"Police protection" is an oxymoron. Gun laws are like masturbation, they both feel really good, but after you're done you realize you haven't accomplished anything."