Let make more of these. Prez Carter removed so many of them.
Depends where they’re going to be put.
Generally they’re a bad idea because of destabilisation effects.
Tactical nukes are super fun to play with and any military would love to have a go. The M28/M29 Davy Crockett field nuke, basically shoulder launched, was a beautiful thing and it's a shame it never got to be used in the field. Would make for a lot of entertaining stories when it misfires or lands short.
Also, there's no risk of global thermonuclear war than ends mankind.
As is mentioned though, it's destabilizing because if it's Ok for US to use them, then it's definitely OK for everyone to use them. It would be unfair for the US to say only we can nuke people, and they can't nuke anyone else. Anti-nuke treaties would mean nothing and would no longer be enforceable, nor would trade embargoes against nuke pursuers like Iran and North Korea, it would simply be hypocritical.
Still it would be pretty cool. 100 guys over the hill you don't like? Lob a nuke. Bang. They gone.
Basically, it can be used as daisy cutter on the line of NK's artillery along the DMZ.
Thank you, friend. Here is the "phonetic" version of it: jeungbalhada
Why go small?
xampl9 (Moto phone)
February 7th, 2018 6:45pm
Having small ones raises the risk of theft and deployment by terrorist groups.
The thing about nukes was that they were a trigger - once anyone uses one, then everyone uses them. That was the point of MAD. So while Davey Crockett would have tiny nukes that were about 20 tons of TNT, it didn't matter if the nuke was 0.02kt or 200kt or 2Mt, it crossed that threshold and everyone lit off their nukes.
And good. We could do with fewer humans polluting the earth.
>We could do with fewer humans polluting the earth
Trouble is we'd end with nothing much at all left surviving.
Maybe a few cockroaches?