answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

I think so. The premise of MAD states that in the event that one nation becomes aggressive and launches a nuclear ICBM (inter-continental ballistic missile), the victim nation can retaliate by launching nuclear munitions of their own at the aggressor. In layman's terms, both Russia and the United States would be utterly flattened and enter into a state of nuclear Holocaust.

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Was mutually assured destruction a good idea?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What idea of mutually assured destruction?

If you bomb us we'll bomb you so nobody wins


How did the idea of mutually assured destruction affect the Cold War?

Answer this question… It promoted peace by preventing either country from attacking first because of the certainty of an immediate counterattack.


How did the buildup of nuclear weapons promote during the Cold War?

Answer this question… The idea of mutually assured destruction prevented the Soviet Union from launching a nuclear attack on the United States.


What is the idea of mutually assured destruction?

Mutually Assured Destruction is the concept that if someone attacks another they would respond by totally destroying the aggressor, but in the process of doing the destruction the original aggressor would be forced to totally destroy their original victim. Its acronym of MAD is very appropriate as it is mad to be the first aggressor as it would result in their own destruction. It is appropriate with respect to nuclear weapons as superpowers have enough of such weapons to totally destroy the others, and so none would start a nuclear war (to destroy someone) because the other side could/would respond in an equally destructive manner (destroying them).


Is mutually assured destruction based on the tit for tat game theory?

Yes. MAD is derived from the idea that when one side does something, the other side will attempt to do something at least as bad in return. Thus this escalating series of revenge will eventually destroy both sides.


How did the idea of mutually destruction affect the cold war?

Answer this question… It promoted peace by preventing either country from attacking first because of the certainty of an immediate counterattack.


Did the policy of massive retaliation allow the use of nuclear weapons?

Think about it this way; you're President of the USA, and you've hear of the mutally assured destruction. If you want to destroy your country along with another one, the use your weapons against another country. That is the idea of mutually assured destruction. There has not been one bomb dropped onto any other country since 1945; Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Tests have been carried out many times since then, especially during the Cold War. But there has been no nuclear explosions know to the public since then. Nicolas Dupont


What was nuclear deterrence or mutual destruction?

nuclear deterrence - the idea that if you attack me with nuclear weapons then I will attack you back with nuclear weaponsmutual assured destruction - the idea that if you attack me with nuclear weapons then I will totally destroy you with nuclear weapons and if I attack you with nuclear weapons then you will totally destroy me with nuclear weapons - thus any nuclear attack by either party will result in the certain destruction of both parties


What describes the idea of mutuality assured destruction?

Neither superpower would start a nuclear war because the other side could respond in an equally destructive manner. Nova Net


How did the buildup of nuclear weapons promote peace during the cold war?

Answer this question… The idea of mutually assured destruction prevented the Soviet Union from launching a nuclear attack on the United States.


What meant the US would punish the USSR with an all out nuclear attack if they launched a nuclear attack?

This meant that if the Soviets had attacked the US with nuclear-based weapons, the US would not be hesitant to retaliate and strike back with their own nuclear bombs. This idea is what characterises the Cold War, because if one power struck another power with similar capabilities (using such devastating weaponry), then it would mean mutually assured destruction for all participants.


What was the nuclear deterence strategy where the response to a missile attack is so huge that the attacking nation is destroyed?

I think the term you are looking for is Mutually Assured Destruction or deterrence but I'll list some other cold war/nuclear war termonolgy that you might find useful as well. -Brinkmanship: The idea that one never backs down causing the other side to back down first. -Massive Retaliation: This was an American ideal that if America got attacked they would retaliate with massive amounts of bombs. -Mutual Deterence: Its the idea that your country has enough nuclear weapons to defeat the opposing country, and this should act as a deterrence against them acting you. -MAD (Mutually Assure Destruction): A theory that two countries could use its ability to launch a nuclear counterattack to stop the other side from striking. As a result, both side's counties are blown apart.