Now what do you do if you detect SLBM launch from somewhere in the Pacific Ocean? Who do you nuke?
So the answer for deterrence purposes is you don't need to nuke anyone right away, immediate response is only one layer of the onion when it comes to nuclear deterrence.
This doctrine is called "launch on warning". It hasn't been official US policy for 20 years[1]: In 1997, the Clinton administration changed the official policy away from launch on warning to one of retaliation after withstanding an initial first strike.
It's not like in a hypothetical scenario where Russia has launched hundreds of ICBMs at the US in a first strike scenario Trump (or any other president) is going to feel beholden to some promise Clinton made in the 90s.
The president has absolute power over when and how to launch nuclear weapons, and can do so at a moment's notice, as has been covered extensively in the media in the last year where people seemed shocked that the president had this power since they didn't like the new person in office, even though the power itself hasn't changed in more than half a century.
What I'm pointing out is that you've conflated two things. Just because one aspect of your deterrence is the ability to launch your land-based ICBMs within 30 minutes, that doesn't mean that the inability to do so (e.g. because you don't know who struck you) means that you're out of options.
Besides, there's no way someone could amass enough SLBMs in the Pacific to take out two aspects of the US's nuclear triad without the US knowing who owns those submarines.
So Russia is probably the best choice.
IIRC both have about 60 subs and Russia is back at their post-1991 strength.
See the recent WaPo article about them mapping undersea cables.
Support for the only active war on Europe.
Destabilization of EU, NATO, US elections.
---
Take a look at Russian TV and polls. The Russian government (TV propaganda) and people (Putin has 80+ approval) do not want to be friends. (Unless you are Syria, Iran or North Korea).
Would the metric of having invaded two sovereign nations in the last few years count?
Where formerly the right harboured the deepest suspicions of Russia, the liberals have taken over the position, probably as a scapegoat for political retreats.
Posts on HN such as yours and probably mine will turn gray-white fast since if you haven't sufficiently disavowed Goldstein then you are probably a collaborator.
Yes, I am serious. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_dolphin
Honest question - is this the function you'd be optimizing for? What are the implications of earlier space-based detection of a launch? Presumably fast detection of a launch plume would help you find and hunt down the sub, but at that point the missiles are already in the air. I would think that the more important factor is where to hide to minimize chance of detection prior to the launch.
A submarine is at least pretty stealthy, but the heat signature of a missile launch is impossible to hide.
Another way to look at it: the satellite systems described in the article (SBIRS and DSP) are optimised for early detection of a launch. So when considering the deficiencies of those systems, it's correct to consider a hypothetical adversary who optimises for the opposite.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection#Projections_b...
Optimizing deployment in the manner you describe is not aligned to the current mission of these forces / our deterrence relationship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_State_Phased_Array_Radar...
In fact, I am worried about TacNukes - like the kind we see in James Bond movies - being smuggled INTO A CITY!
https://www.wired.com/2002/11/nukes-2/
Here is an article about loose nukes.
North Korea has ALREADY given Syria nuclear material to build a functioning nuclear weapons facility. Google "operation orchard".
I am worried that, as soon as we attack its regime, some sleeper group would use nukes somewhere.
And what do we do in general with rogue nukes? How exactly are they accounted for across every country?
We sleep soundly because there exist men willing to do inhuman things to ensure our security. It's unpleasant until compared to the other options. That's what genuine heroism is like. When Putin is praising that organization he is thinking of something like this. We live very sheltered lives I think.
I was trying to explain to my wife the concept. The example that I used was the person who wants the retail store password. They don't call the store and say over the phone 'hey I am at the Global Mall Store and forgot my password can I have yours?'. Immediate red flag. They start with something simpler and build a reputation as legit. Something like 'hey I am at the Global Mall Store are they saying you have to work until 7pm on Christmas also?' [1]
[1] Then follow that up with other requests over weeks finally culminating the 'password' question.
Naturally in school we were rehearsing in case of a strike but very few fallout shelters existed so we improved our response time for getting in position safely underneath our desks.
I am seriously, completely confident that name would fool the person it's meant to.
At best, it’s trivia, at worst it provides advantage to a rogue nuclear power with active concentration camps.
One problem is that "concentration camp" can mean something like "extermination camp" or something like "internment camp".
The US has a long history of concentration/detainment camps - Native Americans in the 1800s, in the Philippines around 1900, the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII, the recent internments at Guantanamo, Bagram, and likely elsewhere.
Some of those latter ones still exist.
Another issue is that "rogue state" is a controversial term. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_state :
> Both Noam Chomsky and William Blum have used the term in the title of their respective books to categorise the United States as the biggest rogue state in the world and thereby highlight the irony and hypocrisy implicit in the use of the term by the United States.
When I'm felling cynical, it seems that "rogue state" - as it's used by people in the US - refers to any country not willing to agree to US demands or wishes.
I'm sure the intersection of these is not empty, that is, there are likely many people who regard the US as a rogue state with active concentration camps.
