Current US Military

[Smitty-48]

to understand the Reductive in Reductive Escalation

you have to understand that the entrenched interest is to escalate

the MICC wants escalation inherently

but now the Democrats want escalation to distract from Domestic failures by invoking Cold War Two

how to get there ?

you can't get there by going big, you're not going over the pole at the Russians directly

to get the escalation, they have to reduce, go smaller

because the smaller the nuclear weapon, the more usable it is

reduce to escalate, Reductive Escalation

you tell the public you are going smaller, smaller sounds better to them, because they don't understand

[Smitty-48]

when you get down to the size of W76-2 at 2 kilotons yield

now you are getting down into neutron bomb territory

if you take the uranium liner out of a small hydrogen bomb like that, you have a neutron bomb

the hydrogen bomb is a two stage fission-fusion bomb

the plutonium implodes in the first stage, inciting fusion in the second stage lithium-deuteride capsule

but the plutonium is not the fission, the plutonium pit implodes causing fusion

the fission is from an uranium liner around the plutonium, which burns, boosting the yield exponentially

that uranium is also what rains back down to earth, seeded in the debris, as fallout

if you take that uranium booster out of the bomb, it becomes a neutron bomb

a pure fusion weapon, two stage fusion-fusion, plutonium implodes fusing itself & the lithium-deuteride

all heat & radiation, no fallout, because fallout comes from the uranium liner

at that point, you can have a precision guided tactical nuclear weapon, which doesn't even cause fallout

that is the most usable nuclear weapon of them all, which is why America didn't build them

but now that America is going all in for counterforce, the neutron bomb makes sense again

the neutron bomb is the smallest nuke there is, causing the least destruction

and that makes them the most viable ones to use,

even right on your own borders defensively if you're the Russians

which makes them the most dangerous, which induces escalation as things destabilize towards first use

Reductive Escalation, the Arms Race has a logic unto itself

[Smitty-48]

you have to understand where the "MAD" policy came from and why it was mostly political & rhetorical

the public perception now is that the Americans back in the fifties just didn't understand what they were doing

America was going to replace conventional forces and just have nuclear weapons for every mission

that's crazy says the public now

but it was only the public which didn't understand back in the 50's,

the Pentagon knew what the effects would be, they knew the bombs had secondary effects

the problem became fallout, strontium-90 to be exact, the public found out about it, and they freaked out

the Castle Bravo test went awry, it was actually an accident, that let the cat out of the bag

they miscalculated the number of hydrogen atoms in the second stage, it was way bigger than expected

the Pentagon knew about fallout down in the South Pacific, the public just wasn't paying close attention

Castle Bravo dropped fallout on some Japanese fisherman way downrange, and they got radiation poisoning

then it blew up into a big story, the big story in fact, which incited the Anti-Nuclear Movement

this eventually spoiled the party for the Pentagon, they had to find some way to placate the public

so the official story was MAD, the Balance of Terror, Mutual Vulnerability

these bombs will never be used, they are only for deterrence

but the Pentagon never really implemented it, because they kept on making tactical nuclear weapons regardless

you don't have MAD, until you accept the vulnerability, willingly embrace being vulnerable with no defense

you have to let the enemy hold you hostage, you can't try to win the war

if you have any tactical nuclear bombs in your arsenal at all, that makes MAD into a lie

the adversary knows you are faking, because you are still trying to win, you're not accepting the terms of MAD

so MAD never stabilized into fact, they kept building tactical nuclear weapons, which meant it couldn't get there

America never accepted MAD, America deployed B61 tactical bombs to Europe & made nuclear cruise missiles

the Soviets didn't accept MAD, they used it as a cover to secretly build up a massive counterforce option

this is not to say that there is no deterrence, of course there is

but it's not by some magical force called "MAD"

other Hegemons just don't want to pick a fight with the strongest Hegemon, because it would be very costly

but what if you pick a fight with them ?

what if you go at them in the Black Sea ?

now it's not you deterring them, it's them trying to deter you

what if you are not deterred and you just keep going until they are backs against the wall ?

eventually, they will get to the threshold of use them or lose them with their tactical nuclear weapons

because you're not deterring them anymore, now you are trying to force them to capitulate

[DrYouth]

What is the fight really about though

Ideology

Nationalism

NATO?

Land, Resources?

Pride? American Hegemony?

Is this ultimately about The Ukraine?
Its specific history.
Russian atrocities between WW1 and WW2

What is the fight about... and how does it get settled?

And how are tactical nukes going to make the difference one way or the other?

[Xenophon]

The fight is about maintenance of the American Global Hegemony by the American Oligarchic class. There is no settling in this fight. This is the Forever War.

Tactical nukes are a strategic positioning tool, until everything accelerates due to the internal logic of nuclear escalation/de-escalation.

[DrYouth]

The fight is about maintenance of the American Global Hegemony by the American Oligarchic class. There is no settling in this fight. This is the Forever War.

Well... without American Hegemony there will be a power vacuum...

And Europe isn't going to fill it... as fractured as it is.

So who does that leave?

China is the obvious answer... but Russian considers itself a viable contender.

So I would say there is settling.

There is a balance of powers, or there is a global hegemon.... those are the only choices.

Power is not that complicated.

So that's the answer I guess... Ukraine is the square on the chess board where the balance of powers is being tested.

[Xenophon]

I think it will be settled eventually, but I don't think they have a long-term strategic goal in mind beyond continuing American Hegemony over the world. Something has to give at some point. The American Oligarchic class wants stasis.

[Smitty-48]

all Hegemons have an arc, but I find America's geostrategic position remains strong

domestic crises, such as the Guilded Age or the Great Depression, these did not unseat the American Hegenomy

just because America is having riots in the streets, doesn't mean she's gonna lose in a head to head confrontation

in fact, in both cases, Guided Age & Great Depression, America came out swinging when she was attacked

[Smitty-48]

America's geostrategic advantage remains

two oceans separating her from Eurasia, to the north is Canada, to the south is Mexico

no natural enemies, no threats on her frontiers

every other Hegemon is locked in a life & death struggle with enemies right on their frontiers

for example, China main adversary is not America, it's a rising India

Russia & Europe are going at it again, they are paralyzed by that as well

neither Russia not China is in an offensive expansionist position

the confrontation is about America being right up in their kitchens, inciting them into Anti Access Area Denial (A2AD)

[Smitty-48]

it's like when I say MAD is not in effect, that's not to say that America's position is weak, quite the opposite

MAD is not in effect, because Russia & China are weak, leaving America is in the first strike position

the Obama Doctrine is a product of America's overwhelming advantages

the doctrine is America doesn't need MAD, America can go offensive if she needs to, all options on the table