Concerning Mutual Assured Destruction

Aesop wrote a piece concerning nuclear missiles last week. His premise is based on the MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) policy which means nobody wins in a nuclear war. Is the premise behind MAD sound enough to prevent a nuclear holocaust which would wipe out all sides? Rather than explore whether sound minds would prevent a nuclear war, let’s explore a different analysis using Oreshnik missiles which have no nuclear fallout, pinpoint accuracy and multiple warheads.

From a question to Grok:

Comparing the energy released by the Oreshnik missile attack to that of a nuclear missile involves understanding the scale of nuclear weapons, which can vary significantly in yield:

  • Oreshnik Missile (Conventional Use): The Oreshnik, when used with conventional warheads, has an estimated kinetic impact of approximately 2.5 kilotons of TNT.
  • Nuclear Missiles:
    • Tactical Nuclear Missiles: These have a wide range of yields but can start from around 1 kiloton up to several kilotons or even more. However, even at the lower end, the energy release is often in the same ballpark or can exceed the kinetic impact of the Oreshnik when used conventionally.
    • Strategic Nuclear Missiles: These are designed for much larger yields:
      • Little Boy (Hiroshima): Had an explosive yield of about 15 kilotons.
      • Modern ICBMs: Can range from several hundred kilotons to several megatons. For instance:
        • The W88 warhead used on the Trident II missile has a yield of 475 kilotons.
        • The Russian SS-18 Satan ICBM can carry warheads with yields up to 20 megatons, though most modern deployments involve multiple smaller warheads.

In summary:

  • Oreshnik’s Kinetic Impact: Approximately 2.5 kilotons.
  • Nuclear Missiles:
    • Tactical: From 1 kiloton upwards.
    • Strategic: From several hundred kilotons to multiple megatons.

Thus, even a small tactical nuclear weapon would release energy comparable to or greater than the kinetic impact of the Oreshnik missile when used conventionally. However, if the Oreshnik were to carry a nuclear payload, its destructive capability could be significantly higher, potentially reaching or exceeding the yields of many tactical nuclear weapons.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There is a large difference between a nuclear warhead or warheads vs. an Oreshnik missile strike. If the enemy has a weapons’s system that is capable of inflicting damage on the scale of a nuclear warhead with no radiation released, the nuclear deterrent of a counterstrike escalating into a world war is reduced. The implied threat that future launches may be nuclear also is a new twist in the world’s war picture.

Do not become complacent that Russia or the West will not launch nuclear missiles even if that is the only option available to win a war. Russia’s ability to launch conventional warheads at a high rate of speed with the same results as a nuclear attack (minus the radiation) has changed the logic on the battlefield.

David DeGerolamo

    
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.
5 2 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Quatermain
1 hour ago

Oreshnik has made World War possible with the potential to be non nuclear as you have pointed out, David.. That is the game changer. the Pentagon could be removed in its footprint and at least 3 stories underground with no other significant damage to DC. That is huge. Decapitations are now feasible with ICBM’s. Israel just showed us how effective decapitation’s can be. Russia showed the world it is feasible. What is mind boggling is how many people do not grasp this.

Michael
Michael
1 hour ago

A useable ICBM. One with enough controlled power to destroy pretty much anything no matter how deeply buried.

A no aircraft needed bunker buster.

Depending on the target some chance of nuclear fallout but still very dangerous for status quo.

I’d be surprised if that much kinetic energy wouldn’t have some serious fire hazard if conditions were right. A mountain I know with plenty of dry pine trees might have a pretty large wildfire to complicate the search and rescue work if any.

MAD however only exists IF Sane Minds are involved. Crazy people willing to “Burn it all down” don’t worry about fallout from their actions.

And yet Aesop was suggesting in various forums that Ukraine should be GIVEN Nuclear weapons so “Puti Pu” as he calls Putin would flee rather “Promptly” back to pre-war boarders and plead for mercy.

Like handing out Nuclear weapons whilly nilly would secure “SAFETY From the Evil Puti Pu”.

As I was providing medical support for John F Kennedy Special Warfare Center when Saddam and Ortega were being trained, the USA’s ability to select and equip good Dictators seems pretty poor as we ended up fighting both of them.

So, handing out even tactical B 61 dial a nuke’s seems unwise at best.

But I’m not the military expert like Aesop. Just a combat medic.