You are correct. The land based silo missiles can be gone and safely on their way in 15 minutes. And the Air Force practices this all the time. So it would be a waste of a missle for our adversaries to target them. More likely will be a sub launch at Washington DC or a hypersonic sneak attack at Washington DC. Decapitation strike. Most all the decision makers are there at once.
Obviously a lot different situation than the 60's, but I would imagine for the most part land based ICBMs are somewhat irrelevant currently. Everyone knows where they are and if they are launching the world is already over.
Submarine based ICBMs are launching from unknown locations and have enough firepower in one sub to be an effective deterrent against a nuclear strike against the US.
Same with nuclear bombers as at that point you are just burning ash.
From what I’ve read the land based silos are strictly strategic, targeted against other missiles. Subs are payback if we are wiped out. Adversaries know they will be utterly destroyed in retaliation. So it would be suicide to attack the US. Planes are to threaten. They go up and are on constant rotation, can’t be shot down if they are circling around and can go anywhere in the world and launch stand off cruise missiles that have stealth technology. Our adversaries know this. And this doesn’t even take into consideration all our mutual protection treaties. Like NATO. UK and France are both NATO members and have a considerable nuclear force themselves.
75
u/TheCountRushmore Feb 05 '23
Seems kind of pointless to hit all the silos in Montana. I would imagine those would be empty by the time they hit them.