I'm not really here
Join Date: Aug 2006
Over the years we have eroded our overall military capability. The Tories have taken the armed forces apart limb from limb and retained the option of nuclear deterrent. To be fair, Labour are complicit also. Other NATO countries have done likewise to some degree, I think.
As Starkers says, the deterrent was always the unthinkable response to the unthinkable outrage - mutually assured destruction. There is no tactical aspect to the weaponry other than that.
The real world is tactical and strategic and complex. It's politics and nationalism and religion and factions. It's ideology and self-interest. It's a combination of all of the best and worst of human traits - and the answer, if all of that boils down to something outrageous, is what? A massive thermonuclear strike aimed at the very heart of what?
At people who are being subjugated by ISIS but who just happen to exist close to the centre of ISIS power? There's a lot of collateral potential when the only hammer you've got reckons at 100 megatons x 8. Nagasaki about 20 megatons I think.
The answer, if there ever is one, is around politics, international relations, diplomacy, charity, humanity, friendship and negotiation.