JDMA there are no winners when it comes to using nuclear weapons, whether it’s a first response or in retaliation to our enemies use of these weapons. Radiation doesn’t just land where a bomb explodes, it spreads across the planet.
I agree fully with jimK and his assessment on using nuclear weapons.
The godlike power to end the world as we know it by engaging in a full-out nuclear conflict needs to be restrained in as many ways possible. We have all been witnessing the nut-balls current running our government and THEY ALL NEED RESTRAINTS. I say NO to first use of nuclear weapons EVER. If multiple nuclear capable missiles were ever launched targeting our country, then a rapid and measured in-kind response would certainly be required- without escalation beyond any 'in-kind' response. The world might survive that. Our defense against nuclear attack comes mainly from the deterrence arising from our having a decisive ability to strike back- which hopefully we will never have to use. … …. A much better solution to all of this is to build the world-wide coalition necessary to tackle the looming impacts of climate change. This will be costly and require world-wide coordination, planning and commitments to stop and hopefully reverse these threats as well as to provide aid to countries with populations suffering from changing watersheds, loss of productive crop lands and vanishing coastal lowlands. When world leaders have to work together to solve a common problem- it is much less likely that they will also be trying to destroy one another.