The Nuclear Deterrent (Part 2) - Why Stockpile?

In part one of these questions, approx 2/3 felt the nuclear deterrent was a necessary evil. My next thought is why stockpile nuclear weapons that could deliver multiple times the potential of devastation needed to make a point.

The Nuclear Deterrent (Part 2) - Why Stockpile?

  • It is basically a boys pissing contest, see who can get highest
    50% (1)39% (7)40% (8)Vote
  • It is imperative a country appears stronger than their rivals
    50% (1)50% (9)50% (10)Vote
  • Just Nosey - See Results
    0% (0)11% (2)10% (2)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy

0|0
0|12

Most Helpful Guy

  • Actually found an interesting response to this, both why it occured and why it seems to be obsolete.

    0|0
    0|1

What Girls Said 0

No girls shared opinions.

What Guys Said 11

  • Well

    1. So you have enough ordnance to take out the country that fired on you.

    2. To make yourself look stronger then an enemy.

    3. To have enough for multiple nations if need be.

    Basically you want to have a lot of them because if an enemy nation attacks you the first thing they will do is take out your nuclear launch facilities. And if they can not take them all out then they will face nuclear retaliation, or mutually assured destruction, the more nukes you have the higher chance there is for the enemy to miss a few, and if the enemy is not sure they can take them all out then they will not attack in the first place because the risk is to high.

    If you do not have enough nukes for this then an enemy will take them all out at once, and then proceed with an invasion and subjection of the enemy population. In which case a nation will fall, unless the civilian and military population can repel an invasion like that.

    Of course if an enemy wants to take your nation without nukes then they will launch an invasion, most likely sending spies to sabotage it first or create a distraction large enough that would enable them to get close enough that by the time you noticed it would be to late.

    I would be more worried about the development of even greater weapons of mass destruction, such as biological weapons which in a way are way more frightening they are not only effective but man can create much deadly and horrific viruses then those you find in nature. As well as weapons that could be created when technology advances to that point such as anti-matter weapons.

    0|0
    0|1
    • Valid points and also very scary the progress in the development of non nuclear weapons

  • The main idea is that you have more bombs than your enemy can destroy.
    Let me explain:
    In case the hostile nation attacks you first, it is imperative to destroy all your nuclear weapon in its first strike, otherwise it has to face nuclear retaliation. But the more nukes you have, the higher are the chances that the attacker will miss a few bombs and those left over bombs wil finally destroy him. It's part of the whole Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine.
    So, if the attacker knows his chances of destroying all your nukes at once are low, he won't attack you because the risk is to high.

    0|0
    0|1
    • Interesting concept - I had never thought of it that way before

  • The amount of stockpiles has decrease drastically in all major nuclear weapon countries. I am very familiar with nuclear weapons and not too worried about them because of the safeguards that are currently in place. The IAEA tends to do a great job. I would be much more concerned about the development of anti-matter weapons.

    0|0
    0|0
    • That is a very valid point about non nuclear weapons

    • Show All
    • @Phoenix98 you really need to study up on weapons and technology. It is extremely clear your limited knowledge on the subject when you refer to the types of weapons you do and their effects. Biological weapons would contaminate natural resources as well. I said in my previous comment that I wasn't referring to radiation. Powerful lasers require tremendous amounts of energy to operate so that limits their wide spread use. What you said in your opinion about another country taking out nuclear launch sites is something that would be stated from someone of a limited background on such topics. Biological weapons are not going to be king of the weapons of mass destruction. You should probably study up on your physics.

    • If stopping a nuke was as simple as shooting it down, or stopping it with a laser grid system then there would not as big of a concern over nukes as there are currently. If any country lived by that logic they would be conquered faster than they could ever imagine.

  • The US has been heavily cutting their supply of nukes, so are most countries except those who are researching and creating them like russia/iran or any other volatile nation. But it used to be all about creating them now its all about technology, in which many countries not just the US are focusing on. I did see that the people from Hiroshima were calling for the eradication of nuclear missiles... which lets be honest... is not going to happen for a very long time. Quite a shame.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Yes I think it is more who has control of the weapons rather than the amount of them

  • To me nukes have become a bargaining chip in the modern era. Ie if I have nukes I have more power in international negotiations than a country without

    0|2
    0|1
    • Yes that seems to be the way some governments think

  • This video explains it pretty well
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9FSiMjnUNI

    0|0
    0|1
    • That looks a very good youtube channel must look at more of their videos

  • one bomb might not be enough, look at japan it toke 2 bombs before they figured out that they were beat

    0|0
    0|2
  • We have enough nuclear capability to destroy the world many times over. That should be sufficient.

    0|0
    0|1
  • A combination of A and B.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Just in case evil aliens invade the Earth.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Show of power. To intimidate, because during cold war it's basically just two tough guys in a cage. To make the other bow down, show how much power you have.

    1|0
    0|1
    • Yes that seems to be the way some governments think

Loading...