Just to reiterate: there is no such thing as limited nuclear warfare. And anyone who says otherwise is willfully ignorant of nuclear weapons (hint: even a “low yield” one isn’t small) and is kidding themselves about how other countries would respond to an attack.https://twitter.com/MichaelJDoidge/status/1232377715908583424 …
Exactly. A taboo won't long hold if we blur the clear lines. Also: wars do not stay limited! Escalation is *never* controllable by only one side! I am stunned that 'just a little war' is still considered a credible policy. Because that 'just a little war' in 1914 went so well!
-
-
Yeah. Totally weird and unexpected that the other side gets a say in things. Also that itsy bitsy problem of chance/friction/fortuna/luck/fate (whatever your theorist of choice calls it)
-
Right! That limited Roman War in Sicily in 264, man, that sure stayed nice and contained and totally didn't turn into two massive multi-decade conflicts. This is such a Strategy-101 lesson and yet, like the Gods of the Copybook headings, we limp up to explain it once more!
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.