Quote:
Originally Posted by Human No More
North Korea? Iran? Pakistan?
The whole theory of 'the only winning move is not to play' assumes you still want to survive the war. Back then, there were no psychotic dictatorships with nuclear weapons, only the US, UK, France, NATO countries with some of the US', and the USSR. All of those had an actual interest in their continued survival and nuclear weapons were (and still are for those countries) intended as a deterrent, not a 'take the rest of the world with us' option.
On the other hand, if Iran, North Korea and Pakistan were to be eliminated or to become democratic, then the risk of nuclear war would suddenly become a lot lower. Not even China would engage in a nuclear war which would result in their annihilation too. Every civilised nation with nuclear weapons knows that even a direct hit on a well developed country's population centres would not harm their capacity to retaliate (USA, UK, Russia, France, Israel and China all have this capability), not to mention the fact that launches cam be made within the warning window.
|
I'm afraid I have to disagree on you on the topic of Iran, North Korea and Pakistan. I feel that they have nuclear weapons mainly used as a deterrent.
Pakistan developed their weapons in response to India nuclear weapons after the 1971 war in an attempt to counter Indian miltary superiority, an attempt to prevent a further indian invasion by use of the MAD doctrine.
North Korea developed nuclear weapons to provide a further deterrent against invasion either by the south or the US. Again its the MAD doctrine, if you attack us we can hit you hard (assuming they can get their rockets to work)
Iran is an semi-isolated state who is in a stand off with two nuclear powers (Israel and the USA) the later having a massive miltary superiority. Acquiring nuclear weapons would protect them from attack via the MAD doctrine.
Of course these states have their problems. Pakistan is suffering internal ethnic conflicts and its intelligence services are supporting terrorist groups but as far as I see the army itself (though weak) is stable. North Korea may be a brutal dictatorship but its leadership is more concerned with thier lifestyles and therefore have no reason to risk being deposed through a war. Iran is a bit of a wildcard due to the power of radical clerics but from what I see the government knows the risks and so steer close to the edge but doesn't try to fully cross it, after the invasion of iraq and the fear of US invasion they slowed down their missile side of their weapon programme.