The cost/benefit is actually pretty good, and we can see it play out in North Korea right now.
See the thing about nuclear weapons is that they only need to be 'in working order,' to be effective. What's that effect?
You don't get invaded. That's their entire use. You might fight a proxy war, you might not get your way, but quite simply you don't get invaded.
No country will ever have their tanks on US, UK, French, German, North Korean, Russian, Chinese, Indian, or Pakistani soil. Ever. It's not happening. So all military funding for these countries is no longer on 'defense' it's on 'offense and upkeep of nuclear weapons.'
That enables countries to massively overhaul their militaries to be much more imperialistic (in the cases of the US and Russia, now also China), or reduce military spending overall to minimum levels in order to accomplish their foreign policy goals (i.e. France/UK/Germany).
If you have nuclear weapons, no one is invading you since you can end the world if you start losing. Regardless of the cost, it is a ridiculously good benefit given the existence of imperialist countries that can and do invade random countries regularly (see US and Russia.)
Azumarillussy t1_iu6t4ca wrote
Reply to comment by Spinaccio in Australia drops opposition to treaty banning nuclear weapons at UN vote by misana123
The cost/benefit is actually pretty good, and we can see it play out in North Korea right now.
See the thing about nuclear weapons is that they only need to be 'in working order,' to be effective. What's that effect?
You don't get invaded. That's their entire use. You might fight a proxy war, you might not get your way, but quite simply you don't get invaded.
No country will ever have their tanks on US, UK, French, German, North Korean, Russian, Chinese, Indian, or Pakistani soil. Ever. It's not happening. So all military funding for these countries is no longer on 'defense' it's on 'offense and upkeep of nuclear weapons.'
That enables countries to massively overhaul their militaries to be much more imperialistic (in the cases of the US and Russia, now also China), or reduce military spending overall to minimum levels in order to accomplish their foreign policy goals (i.e. France/UK/Germany).
If you have nuclear weapons, no one is invading you since you can end the world if you start losing. Regardless of the cost, it is a ridiculously good benefit given the existence of imperialist countries that can and do invade random countries regularly (see US and Russia.)