So would you?

[Barry]

If it has got to that stage use your weapons to kill as many of your current enemies as possible, starting with Putin, if we have any ideas where he is.
There's no turning the other cheek for this.

[papasmurf]

Where I live has several targets for nuclear attack by "the enemy" close by. (One is only a few hundred metres away.)
I would be vaporised and not be available to make a decision.

[johnofgwent]

I probably saw the same documentary then, I recall one about that time, talking about the letter of last resort.

For me, it isn't about spite, it's about vengeance

In the scenario of a Russian nuclear strike, my letter of last resort would call for a strike on Korea using isotopes engineered to be traceable to Putin, and on Wuhan using ones engineered to be traceable to Kim.


Because I never forgave the Russians for Markhov, and we do not have enough weaponry to do enough damage to Russia to the degree i feel necessary to make them understand the mistake they made.


Xi and Kim however ....

[Borchester]

Year or two (probably more)back I was flipping through the channels late at night and this was posed to some politicians,you are PM the UK has been attacked with nuclear missiles by Russia and the country is devastated.

Would you order a retaliatory strike,well they all rabbit on or some time on the ins and outs and the conclusion was no it would be the wrong thing to do.

So I'm sat there thinking "tossers" too bloody true I'd fight back and order a nuclear strike.

What's the point having a nuclear deterrent if you aren't going to retaliate,not interested in the argument it's a bad thing to do you're attacked you retaliate.

Anyway there's the question would you or not and why?

I would order a retaliatory attack.

I am a spiteful bastard.

[cromwell]

Year or two (probably more)back I was flipping through the channels late at night and this was posed to some politicians,you are PM the UK has been attacked with nuclear missiles by Russia and the country is devastated.

Would you order a retaliatory strike,well they all rabbit on or some time on the ins and outs and the conclusion was no it would be the wrong thing to do.

So I'm sat there thinking "tossers" too bloody true I'd fight back and order a nuclear strike.

What's the point having a nuclear deterrent if you aren't going to retaliate,not interested in the argument it's a bad thing to do you're attacked you retaliate.

Anyway there's the question would you or not and why?