When you think about it, have nuclear weapons actually SAVED the world from apocalyptic war?
If nuclear weapons were never invented, and thus the concept of mutually assured destruction as we know it never existed, then what are the odds that the US and Russia would have never gone to war?
Sure, even a conventional war between the US and the Soviets/Russians would likely be a case of mutually assured destruction in a sense, but not to the extent of a nuclear exchange.
Do we actually have nuclear ICBMs, held by both countries, to thank for keeping the Cold War cold?
Because if you remove that from the equation, my guess is it would have gone hot real fast.
- Donald KLv 64 months agoFavorite Answer
Yes. We maintained, expanded and improved our nuclear arsenal during the cold war to deter the soviets. With every passing decade we developed more and more advanced nuclear weapons that terrified the soviets and maintained superior first strike capability. The Soviets stayed in line because they knew we would not hesitate to launch nuclear weapons if they invaded West Germany or South Korea.
If we thought like Elizabeth Warren during the Cold War, we would have been destroyed. That's why its so ironic that Democrats claim to be the "adults in the room" when they clearly have no idea how important it is to remind the world the the US CAN and WILL strike first if provoked.
- 4 months ago
Probably has for the time being, BUT at the end of the day it will be the destruction of us all except for intervention by YHVH GOD.
- durango joeLv 74 months ago
I believe that without nukes The US and NATO would have fought the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact.
There are several times such a war could have fared up.
One was during the Berlin air lift when the Soviets cut off ground access to Berlin in order to force the west to cede western Berlin.
- Fenian RisingLv 64 months ago
I believe so because either would have believed they could have been tactically more aware in a conventional war and have the manpower and the nohow to beat the other and as you say the thought of mutual destruction using an ICBM carrying a nuclear warhead was a great deterrent during that period, there were however many proxy wars between the two which reacted havoc on other countries and there are still proxy wars going on but these are largely geopolitical as apposed to idealistic like the cold war period
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- thomas fLv 74 months ago
What you are describing has been labeled the "Pax Atomica" or the "Atomic Peace". However, I personally do not believe there will ever be any more major wars on the battlefield, atomic weapons or no atomic weapons. Why? Humans have always fought over power and will continue to fight over power. In most of our history, power was derived entirely from land, and the populations inhabiting the land. So it follows that wars were fought over control and ownership of land. But power is no longer derived from land ownership, for the most part. (Although an argument could be made for control of specific natural resources, derived from land.) Nowadays, power is derived from manufacturing and economic prosperity and technological prowess, not land. So nowadays we are fighting over economic and technological prowess, which is a battle that occurs in the marketplace, not on the battle field.
Just a thought.Source(s): If the USA invaded and conquered Russia, what would be the advantage to us? (Hardly anything).
- bondLv 74 months ago
Yes, I think it has stopped any all out wars. But not the little wars going on all over the world.
- IanLv 64 months ago
No, they were an extremely good way of moving huge sums of global tax-payers' money into the US economy. Wars are simply business events.
- Anonymous4 months ago
It makes winning less desirable. Newer weapons like Thor will makes nukes less omnipotent and more vulnerable.
- Curtis 1911Lv 74 months ago
Yeah sounds like a plausible ideer,,,kinda like how people are more polite to each other walking around in open carry or concealed carry states.
- Climate RealistLv 74 months ago
We probably would have had a war at least as destructive as WWII. At least as destructive as WWII was in Eastern Europe, where Russia lost over 3 million people.