0
What else can I help you with?
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 is the difference between deterrence by denial and deterrence by punishment?
Fred Korkisch This is a rather artificial question, because in the official literature the term "deterrence by denial" was never used, asked, nor answered, nor mentioned. The post-nuclear literature tried to invent and imagined a number of terms and phrases that were never used by the people who wrote about nuclear war planning and doctrine. Deterrence was either used in relation to * Gradual Deterrence (see: The gradual use of nuclear weapons, or a gradual use of force, like the escalation President Johnson used against North Vietnam etc.); * Minimum Deterrence (see: The threat to use force, including nuclear weapons on a limited scale, or the minimum number of strategic weapons which provides a credible deterrence; see SALT, START); * Finite Deterrence (see: The nuclear capabilties which will survive any enemy attack, available for a devastating counterstrike, like SLBM-weapons on submarines; * Deterrence by Punishment (this is a rather juridical term, used after WW II, to explain the legal rightfulness of the bombardments of German and Japanese cities, as a justified "punishment" for the aggressions of both states, used later on for the possible use of nuclear weapons as a retaliatorial strike. To explain "Deterrence by Denial" one can follow the logic of protection of nuclear delivery systems by various measures, like dispersal of bombers, missiles in silos, SLBM-submarines etc.
How the US use nuclear weapons as a deterrent?
The U.S. uses nuclear weapons as a deterrent by maintaining a credible and survivable nuclear arsenal that can respond to any nuclear attack, thus discouraging adversaries from launching such attacks. This strategy, known as "mutually assured destruction," relies on the threat of devastating retaliation to prevent conflicts from escalating into nuclear war. Additionally, U.S. nuclear policy emphasizes extended deterrence, assuring allies that they are protected under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, further stabilizing global security dynamics.
Indian rank in nuclear weapons in world?
fifth rank in nuclear weapons
What is the purpose of nuclear warfare?
The purpose of nuclear warfare primarily lies in deterrence, as nations possess nuclear weapons to prevent adversaries from engaging in aggressive actions due to the fear of catastrophic retaliation. Additionally, some states may view nuclear capabilities as a means to assert power and influence on the global stage. However, the actual use of nuclear weapons is often seen as a last resort due to the devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences they entail. Ultimately, the existence of nuclear warfare raises complex ethical and security dilemmas in international relations.
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 has the author John T Cappello written?
John T. Cappello has written: 'Tactical nuclear weapons' -- subject(s): Deterrence (Strategy), Military policy, Nuclear arms control, Nuclear weapons, Tactical nuclear weapons
What is the difference between deterrence by denial and deterrence by punishment?
Fred Korkisch This is a rather artificial question, because in the official literature the term "deterrence by denial" was never used, asked, nor answered, nor mentioned. The post-nuclear literature tried to invent and imagined a number of terms and phrases that were never used by the people who wrote about nuclear war planning and doctrine. Deterrence was either used in relation to * Gradual Deterrence (see: The gradual use of nuclear weapons, or a gradual use of force, like the escalation President Johnson used against North Vietnam etc.); * Minimum Deterrence (see: The threat to use force, including nuclear weapons on a limited scale, or the minimum number of strategic weapons which provides a credible deterrence; see SALT, START); * Finite Deterrence (see: The nuclear capabilties which will survive any enemy attack, available for a devastating counterstrike, like SLBM-weapons on submarines; * Deterrence by Punishment (this is a rather juridical term, used after WW II, to explain the legal rightfulness of the bombardments of German and Japanese cities, as a justified "punishment" for the aggressions of both states, used later on for the possible use of nuclear weapons as a retaliatorial strike. To explain "Deterrence by Denial" one can follow the logic of protection of nuclear delivery systems by various measures, like dispersal of bombers, missiles in silos, SLBM-submarines etc.
Do you profit from making Nuclear weapons?
It is unclear who "you" is in this scenario. There are many who profit from making nuclear weapons, especially the individuals who are paid to assemble the weapons and their components. Whether or not nuclear proliferation is profitable as a form of conflict deterrence is still very controversial.
Are nuclear weapons effective?
Yes they are very effective. Nuclear weapons are dangerous and really effective to destroy all life on earth. They are very powerful.
What is the definition of strategic deterrence?
The military used to advance the concept that the possession of nuclear weapons would assure the owner nation freedom from attack. The attack on the US Cole, and various attacks in Russia, Britain, and so on have shown that most of the time, a nuclear response would be overkill (no pun) and of negative effect. In summary, Nuclear deterrence assures (assumes) that a nuclear response would be expected if a nuclear attack were made. War continues to be profitable.
What role did nuclear weapons play in President Kennedy's foreign policy?
President Kennedy saw US nuclear weapons as a tool of deterrence against Russian aggression and necessary for securing mutually assured destruction.
What has the author Stephen Shenfield written?
Stephen Shenfield has written: 'The nuclear predicament' -- subject(s): Communism and nuclear warfare, Government policy, Military policy, Nuclear warfare, Nuclear weapons 'The mathematical-statistical methodology of the contemporary Soviet family budget survey' 'Minimum nuclear deterrence' -- subject(s): Deterrence (Strategy), Military policy, Nuclear warfare
What role do nuclear weapons play in the theory of deterrence?
If you have a nuke no other country would want to mess with you thus "deterring" them from attacking
What has the author Adam Suddaby written?
Adam Suddaby has written: 'The nuclear arms race' 'The nuclear war game' -- subject(s): Military policy, Nuclear weapons, Nuclear warfare, Deterrence (Strategy), Arms race, History, United States, Great Britain
What is the theory of mutual deterrence?
Who uses the Sword(or nuclear weapons) will be killed by the sword(by nuclear weapons).Because we like our lives und dont want to be killed,we will not take the risk to start a war.Mutual deterrence ist the "law of rationality"Suicid is irrational. Theory of mutual deterrence becomes obsolet,when religious fanatism eliminates the fear to die. Mutual deterrence theory is based on the "equilibrium of Powers" It does not work efficiently for Peacekeeping politics,when there is no perfect Information about real military potentials (own and others).Believed Superiority might cause an attack with convential weapons.A nuclear war has no winners at all.Mutual deterrence therefore is the Strategie to prevent the total selfextinction of all mankind.
What do we call the stategy of building large amounts of nuclear weapons in order to stop the other side from attacking you?
deterrence if both sides do it it is known as MAD (mutually assured destruction)
