Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
i thought the military doctrine around tactical nukes was for the use of defense in an area being invaded. My understanding was it was more a political statement meant to specify they will only use tactical, and only in that situation, and that would clarify the 'unknowns' of nuclear warfare.. etc etc
|
Actually it came from the Soviet military doctrine and there is nothing about politics. Russia considers aircraft carrier battle groups useless in case of the full-scale conflict with another superpower. They (the aircraft carriers) are still useful in small conflicts like we have in Syria, but not against the USA. We had two aircraft carriers and sold one of them to China, because nobody here expects Midway-style ace combats anymore. The fastest and
cheapest way to sink a 4 billion dollar ship with 5,000 men aboard is a small tactical cruise missile which flies about 5 meters above the sea surface with almost 3
Mach speed. It just can't be intercepted, especially if it's not alone... That's very simply and effective. Once again - no politics there, but just a military concept of efficiency: get more for the less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
you are saying they have a doctrine to only attack carriers with tacticals?
|
Course not. The old evil Soviet military doctrine was allowing the use of nuclear weapon for defensive purposes only, the new doctrine allows to use them for attack - e.g. preventive strikes against missile defense systems like the one in Poland. Sounds funny but it's a fact, if Obama or Putin will accidentally fart, some unrelated Poland will be nuked
P.S. An amusing video of flying torpedo made by Soviet rocket genius of 60's (yes, it has to be equipped with a nuclear warhead):