Why do you need a lot of American nuclear bombs?

>>136486187
to destroy the enemy

>>136486187
>Leaving out Israel

Really makes you think.

>>136486573

its right above russia tho

>>136486573
>implying Israeli nukes is real
I bet you believe the Samson option is a thing, too. Guess where Jews inhabit outside those borders.

>>136486187
For duck hunting.

>>136486956
>Pretending Israel doesn't have nukes and won't use them if cornered.

You get a gold star.

>>136486956
out of curiosity why wouldn't Israel make nukes?
Sure they have a puppet but better safe then sorry

File: 51ggVJ88eML.jpg (33KB, 331x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 331x500px

Targeting policy.

If you choose counterforce targeting -- seeking to destroy an enemy's means of making war -- you need many nuclear weapons to cover their silos, airfields, staging areas, command posts, etc.

If you choose countervalue targeting -- seeking to punish the enemy -- you need relatively few weapons to murder their populace and destroy their industry.

The former approach is a far more moral approach to warfighting as it seeks to avoid unnecessary civilian deaths (though there would still be many), but the latter is a.) cheaper and b.) dumbshits think less weapons = less death, which is the opposite of reality. Contrary to popular belief, American nuclear weapons do not target cities. Chinese (for example) weapons do.

TL;DR: you need lots of bombs to fight a war. You need few bombs to murder population centers.

those numbers are wrong for all but France and maybe NK who knows
Humon is an idiot and a shit artist

File: nuclear.png (227KB, 350x2240px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 350x2240px

>>136486187
fixt