Right, it would be done before the US invades, to prevent them from invading. Nuclear weapons are deterrence, you don’t want to actually use them.
I fear my point is being missed.
My point was in response mainly to this last sentence:
I do think a nuclear deterrent would be ideal, but that’s a couple of steps of escalation further down the line I think.
My point is that it cant be further down, because if you are down that far, its too late. We’ve seen this was most countries that became under the gun when they would benefit dearly from having nuclear weapons of their own.
Notably, if Ukraine did so before they would have been fine, but during, they have no chance.
Iran similarly has a difficult time.
Its not about the nation, its about the fact that if you are at a point where you feel the heat is on, its too late to build nukes. Now is the time to build them.
It should be noted that they were never actually their nukes (not their codes or delivery systems), but that this would have been a good time for them to make their own nukes.
I fear my point is being missed.
My point was in response mainly to this last sentence:
My point is that it cant be further down, because if you are down that far, its too late. We’ve seen this was most countries that became under the gun when they would benefit dearly from having nuclear weapons of their own.
Notably, if Ukraine did so before they would have been fine, but during, they have no chance.
Iran similarly has a difficult time.
Its not about the nation, its about the fact that if you are at a point where you feel the heat is on, its too late to build nukes. Now is the time to build them.
What’s sad, is that Ukraine did have nukes. Then this happened in '94: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum Guess who is now a bully.
It should be noted that they were never actually their nukes (not their codes or delivery systems), but that this would have been a good time for them to make their own nukes.