• psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Wikipedia disagrees, though notes that there are weapons that can beat current defence technology

    The Soviet Union could produce enough missiles to overwhelm any defence. Russia now couldn’t afford to maintain a large arsenal, though China can. China doesn’t seem as likely to launch a first strike as the USSR did.

    Of course those systems aren’t protecting you unless you live somewhere important

    • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      What? You can’t say wikipedia disagrees when it lists weapons that can beat current defenses.

    • fullsquare@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The NMD program is limited in scope and designed to counter a relatively small ICBM attack from a less sophisticated adversary.

      also ground-based interceptor is more expensive than ICBM, and you need one for each warhead and maybe also for decoys, and probably more than one to be reasonably sure. since everyone operates under MAD it doesn’t matter if you destroy most probable adversary’s nukes on the ground or in the air, so that’s one of reasons why ICBMs are a thing, and then SLBMs as a second line. cue arms race. ABM are considered destabilizing and are limited by treaties