The significance of MAD, or mutually assured destruction in the Cold War, boils down to the reason behind the term Cold War itself. The Cold War, where conflict was between go-betweens on each side: for example, South Korea vs. North Korea or South Vietnam vs. North Vietnam, were pitched battles between logistics of the Americans and logistics of the Soviets. The Soviets and Americans never engaged in prolonged pitched conflict with each other. It was "cold" because neither side fired weapons at the other, in anger. Otherwise, it would be "hot". Think "hot-headed" and a gun, and "cooled off" and a gun, and you get the gist of it.
Sure, they have a gun, but no one's shooting in the latter.
The reason the conflagration, or an open war never occurred was due to the policy of mutually assured destruction. Mutually assured destruction boiled down to this: with enough nuclear weapons and enough ways of getting them to their destination, anyone who got a first strike would still not be feeling very swell in the morning. No one would get out of the pit without paying dearly for it.
This was the basis of the oft-repeated and cliche line of the physicist Albert Einstein, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
The specter of the nuclear and thermonuclear weapon provided such a tool of utter, wanton devastation, that both sides pursued peaceful dealings with one another, despite the military-industrial complexes of both the Soviet Union and the United States revving up, quite openly to obliterate one another.
The promise of mutually assured destruction, where the mass of nuclear weapons and delivery systems were so great, that both sides knew for certain, if one of the nations fell, so would the other; they avoided the what was once considered "inevitable" conflict that would have happened if mutually assured destruction was not a policy shared between the two.
that was i want to now about it
what was the significance of Mao Zedong in the cold war
American naval power made the Mediterranean its permanent base during the Cold war.
Only if it went hot. If it did...it would've been MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). MAD=Nukes
hats j;gkxgtxxmjfkxx.,golcxhyolf,golgoylf0rl,uypoph1267890
that was i want to now about it
yes I would say the union of communist countries was very significant to the cold war.
what was the significance of Mao Zedong in the cold war
allowing WW3 to come so close
American naval power made the Mediterranean its permanent base during the Cold war.
Only if it went hot. If it did...it would've been MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). MAD=Nukes
ALOT... (No battle during the cold war, just America and Russia being mad at each other)
hats j;gkxgtxxmjfkxx.,golcxhyolf,golgoylf0rl,uypoph1267890
COLD WAR=No Shooting/communists and Free World facing each other Vietnam War=Shooting/communists and Free World shooting at each other
The Soviet Union and The United States
There is no general category for "defensive nuclear weapons" although they were once envisioned as part of an air-defense against massed bombers. The 3 letter acronym for a "defense against nuclear missiles" is ABM, which stands for Anti-Ballistic Missile defense. (There is a related acronym from the Cold War, MAD, for Mutual Assured Destruction, a policy to preclude a first strike in nuclear war by assuring the survival of retaliatory weapons.)
It was a standoff called MAD-mutual assured destruction. Who ever attacked first would also be destroyed. MAD is just what it was---insane.