@Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world • edit-23 days agoIf a country was confident they developed a technology that would act as a fool proof deterrent against nuclear attacks what would that mean for the rest of the world?message-square50fedilinkarrow-up166arrow-down13
arrow-up163arrow-down1message-squareIf a country was confident they developed a technology that would act as a fool proof deterrent against nuclear attacks what would that mean for the rest of the world?@Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world • edit-23 days agomessage-square50fedilink
minus-square@iarigby@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink1•3 days agocore if your question was about the outcome that such technology would have. The reasoning behind the treaty explains that outcome. You’ll benefit from working on being a more receptive to new information
minus-square@Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilink1•3 days agoNo, the response would have been, “nothing” if you truly believe MAD would survive the creation of this hypothetical technology.
core if your question was about the outcome that such technology would have. The reasoning behind the treaty explains that outcome.
You’ll benefit from working on being a more receptive to new information
No, the response would have been, “nothing” if you truly believe MAD would survive the creation of this hypothetical technology.