Is there literally any reason to do this though? Russia has ICBMs which could hit almost anywhere on the planet with a nuclear strike. What difference does the extra couple hundred miles into Belarus make?
Seems like it's an iron curtain arms race again. Nuclear nations don't get proxy warred. Lukashenko likely sees BY as the next possible location for fighting to break out and wants to re-arm to prevent the possibility of retaliatory invasion.
That being said we also live in bizarro world, so NATO could decide that they want to invade anyways and that's how nuclear holocaust begins.
More nukes is a stronger deterrent. You can build more nuclear missiles if some of them are cheaper, and the easiest way to make them cheaper is to make them smaller and shorter range. Deploying nukes closer to the enemy means you can bring more of your stockpile into play, as the cheaper ones will now have more potential targets.
Another factor is the nuclear weapon reduction treaties only count ICBMs, plane dropped nukes, and SLBMs(submarine launches missiles). Nuclear tipped TBMs and SRBMs don't count, and while it's hard to tell because it's all kept secret, most newly built nukes are probably of the shorter ranged type as a result.
Edit: The rule of thumb is called the nuclear triad. That's one third ICBMs, one third SLBMs, and one third plane launched. The planes have become less relevant over time, and have mostly been replaced with shorter ranged missiles.
Is there literally any reason to do this though? Russia has ICBMs which could hit almost anywhere on the planet with a nuclear strike. What difference does the extra couple hundred miles into Belarus make?
Seems like it's an iron curtain arms race again. Nuclear nations don't get proxy warred. Lukashenko likely sees BY as the next possible location for fighting to break out and wants to re-arm to prevent the possibility of retaliatory invasion.
That being said we also live in bizarro world, so NATO could decide that they want to invade anyways and that's how nuclear holocaust begins.
"So what if they have nukes? They'd be crazy to use 'em!" :strangelove:
dont worry we have supersonic nuclear missile defense systems now nothing could go wrong :very-intelligent:
Learning from :gaddafi-stern:
Yep, there's a reason :kim-drip: is still around and at almost complete peace
Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
More nukes is a stronger deterrent. You can build more nuclear missiles if some of them are cheaper, and the easiest way to make them cheaper is to make them smaller and shorter range. Deploying nukes closer to the enemy means you can bring more of your stockpile into play, as the cheaper ones will now have more potential targets.
Another factor is the nuclear weapon reduction treaties only count ICBMs, plane dropped nukes, and SLBMs(submarine launches missiles). Nuclear tipped TBMs and SRBMs don't count, and while it's hard to tell because it's all kept secret, most newly built nukes are probably of the shorter ranged type as a result.
Edit: The rule of thumb is called the nuclear triad. That's one third ICBMs, one third SLBMs, and one third plane launched. The planes have become less relevant over time, and have mostly been replaced with shorter ranged missiles.
I assume it makes them harder to intercept, no?
I don’t think so? Since ICBMs basically go to space to function:
deleted by creator