• RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      20 days ago

      Why not? This is contingent on the US being an unreliable nuclear umbrella… And Germany deciding they will be part of the EU’s nuclear deterrence.

      • Jumi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        I don’t like the idea being part of a country that could kill thousands or even millions of people at once.

        • Birch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          20 days ago

          Well, no, but I’d rather be in the position of the stick holder than the potential pointy end receiver.

          • cabbage@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            Nuclear war is not a stick battle, it’s a knife fight. You’ll both end up bleeding out. Best thing you can do is to not participate.

            People should watch Doctor Strangelove as a fucking case study.

            • sith@lemmy.zipOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              20 days ago

              Best thing you can do is to not fucking participate.

              What if that’s not an option? It could for sure be rational for a violent actor to force it’s will on a non-voilent one. One only needs one rotten apple and the Nash equilibrium dissolves.

              • cabbage@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                20 days ago

                We should be hesitant to accept too many lessons from the American realist school of thought. Their great legacy is to narrowly steer clear of a nuclear holocaust, on several instances out of sheer luck, while repeatedly fucking up huge parts of the world beyond recognition.

                Somehow we celebrate this clown parade for the one disaster they nearly brought upon us, but we narrowly escaped. There’s no lessons to be learned from the Americans, except as a cautionary tale.

                Sure, MAD worked; we only came closer to our own extinction than we ever have in the process.

            • Kaboom@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              20 days ago

              No, that’s not the case anymore. Modern anti-air missile systems can take care of nukes.

              It’s not a knife fight, it’s a “who can spend more money” fight to the death.

              • Skua@kbin.earth
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                20 days ago

                Anti-air systems are absolutely not built to handle ICBMs. The American Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, a dedicated anti-ICBM tool, is estimated to have a 50-50 success rate per counter-missile launched. They only have 44 of them. The Russian counterpart to it uses nukes to nuke the incoming nukes. Just shooting them down is not a solved problem.