The author of the article is typical of a non-military (and Liberal) mindset. He is truly foolish to believe that ANY Nuclear Nation would limit themselves to just 100 Warheads "Since more than 100 weapons would result in the starvation of the attacking Nation's population."
The FIRST counter-question to this reasoning would be... "what do you do IF your enemy attacks conventionally and DISABLES most or all of your 100 warhead arsenal?" This would leave you helpless against their potentially "now imminent Nuclear strike."
The Genie is out of the bottle and we have to live that. That is what makes North Korea with Nuclear weapons so scary. Most of the other governments which possess them have a huge governmental bureaucracy which essentially runs the government. This acts as a "partial hedge" against any "punitive" or "retaliatory" Nuclear strikes (despite MSNBC's attempted misinforming of its watchers about Trump's ability to start WWIII "with the press of a button"). North Korea doesn't have such a mechanism in place and she replaces Pakistan (being so politically unstable) as my number ONE Nuclear worry now.
Swag.
|