When is a country going to use a nuclear bomb? Wth is the point of having them if you are not going to use it?

[$cam-U-Well_Jack$on]

Detterent.

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

You don't know that for a fact. Our ADS are grade A.

Grade A is relative to everyone else. It still isn't perfect and can be penetrated.

 

[Robo Squirrel]

It serves as a deterrent. If Russia didn't have nukes there's a 100% chance NATO would have stepped in already in Ukraine.

100% facts. Russia has over 100 Nuclear weapons.

*I just watched that Openhiermer movie last night. It was about the invention on nuclear warfare. Sad bro.

 

[Tair]

Touched* Squirrel.

 

[AAKing23]

In case you think another country finna use theirs or invade you

 

[Hey_zeus]

Just play CoD or Fallout, weird mf

 

[Robo Squirrel]

Just play CoD or Fallout, weird mf

Your father is a weirdo bytch.

 

[Robo Squirrel]

@coldcall

Putin already said months ago if he loses, the nukes are going up in so many words.

 

[jadillac]

It's all a game of jockeying for position. But nobody wants to actually end the game.

 

[Robo Squirrel]

The purpose of nuclear weapons for most nations is deterrence, rather than actual use. The theory is that the threat of mutual assured destruction, which is the idea that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender, will prevent adversaries from initiating an attack. In other words, the main idea behind nuclear weapons is to prevent wars, not to start them.

Your question seems to presume that a country would use a nuclear weapon because they have them. This logic is fundamentally flawed and dangerous. The catastrophic effects of nuclear weapons were seen after their only use in warfare by the United States in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. The consequences were devastating, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths, and long-term health and environmental impacts. Therefore, the goal of international law and global diplomacy has been to prevent their use and to pursue nuclear disarmament.

So why does nobody, even the greatest military on the planet, fear north Korea?

 

[Robo Squirrel]

It's all a game of jockeying for position. But nobody wants to end the game.

Kim Jong in North Korea is still doing ballistic tests. Like yesterday lol He is aiming his missles at Japan!

 

[Robo Squirrel]

 

[ChatGPT-5]

So why does nobody, even the greatest military on the planet, fear north Korea?

no fear? there's a base in south korea for a reason.

 

[jadillac]

Kim Jong in North Korea is still doing ballistic tests. Like yesterday lol He is aiming his missles at Japan!

Well he might try. But if he keeps up, he'll get bombed on, literally

 

[Robo Squirrel]

The purpose of nuclear weapons for most nations is deterrence, rather than actual use. The theory is that the threat of mutual assured destruction, which is the idea that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender, will prevent adversaries from initiating an attack. In other words, the main idea behind nuclear weapons is to prevent wars, not to start them.

Your question seems to presume that a country would use nuclear weapons because they have them. This logic is fundamentally flawed and dangerous. The catastrophic effects of nuclear weapons were seen after their only use in warfare by the United States in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. The consequences were devastating, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths, and long-term health and environmental impacts. Therefore, the goal of international law and global diplomacy has been to prevent their use and to pursue nuclear disarmament.

I agree with you 100. But first of all, the arms race was with The Russians since way before we were alive.