A thought: Boots on the ground lowers the risk of nuclear escalation

[Ilikepurple]

25. The reply was an argument that it is not obvious that feet on the ground lowers the risk

It seems to provide reasons to assume it might raise the risk. Iran is not the size of Manhattan. Troops don’t have to be near the nuke. Tactical nukes are designed in part to help with troop deployment. Yes, there’s always a risk, especially with insanitary at the helm, but that really wasn’t the point you were responding to. You talk of the “calculus” of war and the “complexity” of life yet I see no complex analysis of the situation. I just see they don’t want to drop nukes on our troops heads, assuming that they have to drop them on their heads and that our commander doesn’t buy into the escalate to de-escalate nuclear military strategy. Moreover, they must already be considering the precedent that using a nuke again would mean to a nuclear armed world or that they even care at all I agree that troops on the ground has some value as a deterrent to the use of a nuclear weapon, but I’m not sure it is greater than the expected response to such an action by allies, enemies, and our voting population itself. The world has been a deterrent since 1945. I feel that unless an actual argument can convince me otherwise, the change in degree of risk troops on the ground brings is up for debate.