Testing Nuclear powered cruise missile design

Apparently the US backed away from this idea years ago.

BTW, what's the appropriate response to a strike by a nuclear powered cruise missile with a non-nuclear warhead that nonetheless creates a radiation disaster in its wake? How to deter this credibly. We can threaten all we want, but the other side has to believe that using one of these things actually would lead to a completely crazy-destructive response.

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
How to deter this credibly.

Ummmm... some sort of arms treaty?

Nah. Those are so 20th century.

Arms control treaties usually require mutual deterrence before both sides are willing to talk.

Arms control treaties also require a President who doesn't decide that they're unnecessary because he's besties with the guy in charge.

As well as good faith. The current administration has shown its willingness to withdraw from any treaty or any agreement, seemingly on a whim or for personal reasons.

Why would anyone negotiate anything with the USA right now? You couldn't trust anything.

Yup. I-1 has spent his entire life proving that agreements are made to be broken. His word is worthless. Even a written, signed contract is worthless. So, who would believe he intends to honor any treaty he signs.

So... we're back to MAD.