Post hoc ergo propter hochttps://twitter.com/NGrossman81/status/1019407228003110912 …
If you did, then I would explain how nuclear deterrence keeps two nuclear powers from fighting each other, but doesn't keep a nuclear power from attacking a non-nuclear state. That requires a commitment to what's called "extended deterrence," which NATO made credible in Europe.
-
-
"Extended deterrence" in Europe was credible because the US had a credible nuclear deterrent, not because NATO existed. US did not even need an alliance to make credible nuclear threats against a nuclear power threatening another country (eg 1973).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.