Posted on Aug 15, 2016
Report Questions Necessity of Nuclear Weapons in Europe
1.06K
6
4
3
3
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
That last paragraph sums it up right there. Sometimes the best things are kept close to the vest of HOME. Besides, all jokes aside, I'd wager there is a boomer or two in virtually every major spot on earth and can really rain down some Steel Rain if the POTUS needed to. Having unsecured Nukes on land we do not 100% control at 100% of the time is a dangerous thought, and Turkey just proved why they don't need to be in certain areas. COL Flemming asks a damn good question with his thread "Nuclear Weapons. What are they for, and should we use them again"? What is the clear, right, answer? Is there one? What good does MAD serve when there is nothing to defend?
(1)
(0)
Wow, SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
The same day that the State Department approved the sale of precision munitions to Belgium, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, etc. Another report "Citing both costs and security concerns, [raised] questions whether the US should continue to keep tactical nuclear weapons in Europe."
If we don't store tactical nuclear weapons in Europe there is no safer area outside the USA to store them.
Bulgaria and Germany are generally safer than the low countries for the foreseeable future.
In the early 1980's I had an ADM secondary mission and expect the security and network has improved since then.
The same day that the State Department approved the sale of precision munitions to Belgium, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, etc. Another report "Citing both costs and security concerns, [raised] questions whether the US should continue to keep tactical nuclear weapons in Europe."
If we don't store tactical nuclear weapons in Europe there is no safer area outside the USA to store them.
Bulgaria and Germany are generally safer than the low countries for the foreseeable future.
In the early 1980's I had an ADM secondary mission and expect the security and network has improved since then.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next