Fucking Ridiculous ANYWHERE: Really? A Missile-Base in Vermont

[wercal]

57. I have no doubt a North Korean attack would lead us to bombing them

...but I see no scenario where we would strike back with a nuclear weapon.

Mutually Assured Destruction worked because the Soviets knew they were an existential threat. They had the capacity to annihilate most of our major cities in a matter of hours...therefore they knew that even the launch (not even the impact) of one nuclear missile would bring massive retaliation.

North Korea is not an existential threat to the US. We would not respond moments after their launch with a devastating missile strike...we would launch a few air strikes. But even if we did have the mindset of nuclear retaliation...the leader of North Korea does not care. MAD presumes the leaders of both sides are sane, and don't want nuclear war. Unfortunately, North Korea doesn't fall into that category.

There is a discussion to be had about how effective star wars is...but we are a few decades out of the MAD scenario, and to depend on it as the ultimate defense is a head in sand mentality, IMHO.

As far as profit goes....the slogan for war profiteers should be 'food and fuel'. If troops are on the ground, they need both of these every day - at a substantial markup of course. That's where the money is. We aren't going to launch a nuclear strike for profit...we probably can't afford to replace any missiles that are fired anyway....and its a one time thing. No the big money is in sending carrier groups to linger all around the world, and building up 'green zones' in Iraq and Afghanistan. More troops equals more cash flow - and the duration can be measured in decades. So I don't think profit motive would lead to a nuclear retaliation, and is somehow embedded in a new MAD paradigm.