Want this question answered?
Nuclear weapons serve as a deterrent. One country will be less likely to attack another that it knows has nuclear capability because of the destruction that could be wrought by nuclear weapons. This theory is called MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction, meaning that both sides would destroy each other so utterly by going to war that peace (even bitter cold peace) is the only viable option. Biological and Chemical weapons, which are also called weapons of mass destruction, do not have this deterrent effect.
Mutual assured destruction (MAD) is a doctrine of military strategy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender.[1] It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the very same weapons. The strategy is effectively a form of Nash equilibrium, in which both sides are attempting to avoid their worst possible outcome-nuclear annihilation. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
Answer this question… The idea of mutually assured destruction prevented the Soviet Union from launching a nuclear attack on the United States.
Nuclear weapons fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape by creating a new paradigm of mutually assured destruction (MAD). The threat of massive, indiscriminate destruction led to a heightened focus on diplomacy and disarmament, as the Cold War standoff between the United States and Soviet Union demonstrated. Additionally, the existence of nuclear weapons increased the urgency of non-proliferation efforts, with countries striving to prevent the spread of these weapons to ensure global security.
mad stands forMutual assured destructionNuclear weaponsHistoryWarfareArms raceDesignTestingEffectsDeliveryEspionageProliferationArsenalsTerrorismAnti-nuclear oppositionNuclear-armed statesUnited States · RussiaUnited Kingdom · FranceChina · India · IsraelPakistan · North KoreaSouth Africa (former)WarfareMilitary historyEras[show]Battlespace[show]Weapons[show]Tactics[show]Strategy[show]Organization[show]Logistics[show]Lists[show]PortalMutual assured destruction (MAD) is a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use ofnuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender,[1] becoming thus a war that has no victory nor any armistice but only total destruction. It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the same weapons. The strategy is effectively a form of Nash equilibrium in which neither side, once armed, has any incentive to disarm.
Nuclear weapons serve as a deterrent. One country will be less likely to attack another that it knows has nuclear capability because of the destruction that could be wrought by nuclear weapons. This theory is called MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction, meaning that both sides would destroy each other so utterly by going to war that peace (even bitter cold peace) is the only viable option. Biological and Chemical weapons, which are also called weapons of mass destruction, do not have this deterrent effect.
Well, yes, and a nuclear war is very unlikely to happen, because of a protocol known by every countries bearing nuclear power, mutually assured destruction. For example, if the US sent all of their ballastic missles to Russia, they would retaliate and send their fleet of missiles to us, and both the US and Russia would be destroyed. Nicolas Dupont
Comic books and movies during the Cold War era often depicted nuclear war as a terrifying and apocalyptic event that could lead to the end of the world. They portrayed the tensions and anxieties of the time, highlighting the destructive power of nuclear weapons and the fear of mutually assured destruction. These stories often featured heroes trying to prevent nuclear war or dealing with the aftermath of such a conflict.
Mutual assured destruction (MAD) is a doctrine of military strategy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender.[1] It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the very same weapons. The strategy is effectively a form of Nash equilibrium, in which both sides are attempting to avoid their worst possible outcome-nuclear annihilation. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
Answer this question… The idea of mutually assured destruction prevented the Soviet Union from launching a nuclear attack on the United States.
During the cold war America pursued a policy called 'mutually assured destruction'. That is if both sides (the US and the Soviet Union) had nuclear weapons neither side would fire because the other side would retaliate resulting in the destruction of both sides and possibly the world. However many people were opposed to nuclear weapons, fearing that a madman could become a ruler and launch missiles anyway. Arms treaties were signed, restricting the proliferation nuclear weapons. There were many protests and opinion was divided on the subject.
Nuclear weapons fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape by creating a new paradigm of mutually assured destruction (MAD). The threat of massive, indiscriminate destruction led to a heightened focus on diplomacy and disarmament, as the Cold War standoff between the United States and Soviet Union demonstrated. Additionally, the existence of nuclear weapons increased the urgency of non-proliferation efforts, with countries striving to prevent the spread of these weapons to ensure global security.
MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction, didn't actually prevent war, there were numerous small wars that were paid for by either the US or the USSR. What MAD did was make nuclear war unthinkable to any sane person. If one of the nuclear club had launched their missiles it would have caused instant retribution with enough atomic munitions to kill the population of the earth several times over. It made it so nuclear war was a no win scenario. A good resource for this is the movie, "War Games".
There are numerous issues concerning Iran. Probably the most talked-about currently is the Iranian Nuclear Program, which Western nations believe is moving towards having a nuclear missile in the near future, but Iran claims is for purely peaceful purposes. Given Iran's intransigence concerning the right of international weapons inspectors from IAEA to verify that the nuclear program is peaceful, the Western view is far more likely. The reason that Western countries fear a nuclear-armed Iran is that the Iranian regime has promoted serious apocalyptic views and will likely see the weapon's destructive capacity in a positive light for bringing on the End Times. Therefore, the theory of "mutually assured destruction" which prevented US-Soviet nuclear war, may not be effective to prevent the religious zealotry that fuels Iranian politics.
the management of soil o prevent its destruction is referred to as soil conservation.
we should not kill them,and prevent deforestation...
As a deterrent.