• FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15時間前

    No matter what, conventional war is horrific and wed be losing our families, homes, friends, and more.

    Which is why I said “preventing America from invading in the first place would be ideal”

    You cant make nukes loudly in such a situation, but ass we’ve seen, you definitely cant make them under the gun.

    Right, it would be done before the US invades, to prevent them from invading. Nuclear weapons are deterrence, you don’t want to actually use them.

    • Credibly_Human@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14時間前

      Right, it would be done before the US invades, to prevent them from invading. Nuclear weapons are deterrence, you don’t want to actually use them.

      I fear my point is being missed.

      My point was in response mainly to this last sentence:

      I do think a nuclear deterrent would be ideal, but that’s a couple of steps of escalation further down the line I think.

      My point is that it cant be further down, because if you are down that far, its too late. We’ve seen this was most countries that became under the gun when they would benefit dearly from having nuclear weapons of their own.

      Notably, if Ukraine did so before they would have been fine, but during, they have no chance.

      Iran similarly has a difficult time.

      Its not about the nation, its about the fact that if you are at a point where you feel the heat is on, its too late to build nukes. Now is the time to build them.