Would it be unethical for the US to retaliate with nuclear weapons if China or Russia launched them first against the US?

>>898274011 (OP)

All WMD are unethical. Not to mention the fact that the entire planet would be annihilated.

>>898274011 (OP)

Yes. Ends don't justify means. Launching a retaliatory strike would be pure revenge and/or hubris.

>>898274011 (OP)

checked

It would just be killing more people. Even if the citizens of those countries would have brought the leaders into power that would have initiated the strikes, they wouldn't have themselves pulled the trigger.

Also retaliation could lead to collateral in neutral countries

Also survivors would need areas to evacuate to, and neutral/supportive countries would be less likely to provide any aid if you retaliated

Why then do we have them as well?

>>898274011 (OP)

If we don't, whatever civilization remains will be comforted with the notion that you can nuke anybody without consequence, regardless how well they're armed. From there it's about a hundred years until whatever government is the most brazen and hostile is the undisputed world hegemon.

>>898274011 (OP)

Mutually Assured Destruction is its own ethics system I think you may be asking the wrong question, is legitimate self defense a moral choice or would it be ethical for the US government to participate in the eradication of all human life on earth?



The moment the military of either of the three governments you have mentioned choses to obey a launch order we've gone past ethics.

>>898274011 (OP)

Like nukes are even required were not some 1st world heckn dopie troons from russia or china. We are a valid type 1 civilization with frequincie and ultrasonic weapons. If the need arose a dial could be turned up or down and the entire hemisphere would shut down into rem sleep wake up whenever master decides in a pool of there own vomit piss shit.

>>898274011 (OP)

Yes. Nuke their asses back into their caves. That's how MAD works.

Yes. War isnt really an ethical thing.

the ethic of self-defense is of course simple and well-established

in any case China or Russia attacking first will mean the end of their people

>>898274011 (OP)

It's only unethical for the leaders in charge, so it's all on the president and military generals. Civilization needs a reset for all the faggotry, so let em fly!

>>898274011 (OP)

What other choice is there?

>>898274011 (OP)

ethics are made up bullshit based on circumstance

humanity tomorrow could all agree rape was ethical if aliens came to our planet and demanded it or they'd blow up earth

so that they don't have the theoretical upper hand



no side would ever use one but just knowing they are there is enough. we're at a stalemate in terms of nukes though

>we're at a stalemate in terms of nukes though

USA can shoot them out of the sky, China and Russia aren't much of a nuclear threat anymore. if they tried they might get 1% through meanwhile we would wipe out their entire infrastructure and maybe a few huge cities

If mutually assured destruction is to be taken seriously, a massive retaliation must be committed to, for the purpose of deterrence.
