EDIT: For clarification, I feel that the current situation on the ground in the war (vs. say a year ago) might indicate that an attack on Russia might not result in instant nuclear war, which is what prompted my question. I am well aware of the “instant nuclear Armageddon” opinion.

Serious question. I don’t need to be called stupid. I realize nuclear war is bad. Thanks!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 years ago

Because it's a hell of a deterrent. If we strategically destroy 99% of the arsenal they're still capable of effectively wiping out any adversary.

There's a reason we haven't been in a shooting war with Russia.

  • source
  • parent