NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

Re:NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War by missosoup on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @09:36AM (#20927986)

1: MAD doesn't really work anymore because of the advent of hypersonic cruise missiles and the likes of russia's Burevestnik/Skyfall. There's probably not going to be a 1980s scenario of two sides launching all out against each other and having a few minutes to contemplate the end.

2: Tactical (not strategic) nuclear weapons are very likely to be used on the battlefield in the next major conflict involving the superpowers. The most plausible pathway to a nuclear armageddon is if the number and yield of these tactical weapons keeps escalating until one side finally has enough and launches a strategic strike.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War by el_cujo on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @10:02AM (#20928271)

>MAD doesn't really work anymore because of the advent of hypersonic cruise missiles and the likes of russia's Burevestnik/Skyfall.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Even if DC gets nuked before it can react, I'm pretty sure there are dead man switch-type systems in place and stuff like submarines equipped with nukes away from home so that even if they whole country was glassed there would be some retaliation. These scenarios probably don't reflect the whole arsenal, so the retaliation wouldn't hit every square inch of the enemy's land, but I would still think that threat is enough to make you not want to start anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War by yesbabyyes on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @10:47AM (#20928818)

Let me see if I got this: Tactics is using the Queen to take out the opponent's pieces, while strategy is throwing the whole chess board to the floor in a tantrum?

Check.

[ Parent | on HN ]