You’ve read too many Tom Clancy novels or something. People can declare whatever they want but unless there really is an attack on NATO, no one is talking about Article 5 and in such a circumstance it would be the attack itself and not the citation to a treaty that would be the issue.
Also, a “full scale thermonuclear exchange” isn’t what it used to be. Stockpiles are orders of magnitude smaller than in the past, and many aren’t “thermonuclear” at all, just fission bombs with higher yield and better targeting.
Reading any Tom Clancy novels is too many, so guilty as charged. I can't unread them.
Since this is a hot war waged by Russia that is neighboring 4 NATO members, it seems as though you are a bit more a casual than would be appropriate. Your comments about nuclear war are not comforting.
You...realize that all "thermonuclear" is is doping your bomb with tritium/a light fusion stage to generate more neutrons, for more complete fission of the fissile primary, right?
All nuclear weapons are fission. Only newer ones are fusion boosted fission devices.
I assure you, there is more than enough nuclear ordinance laying around to ensure WWIV is fought with sticks and stones.
Hard to do with cooked retinas, acute radiation poisoning, and the prospects of living beyond 20 cancer free are minimal.
Also, the world's a big place, even though the internet has made it seem small.
Yes, I understand it'd be nice to watch a good fee choice chunks burn... But I really don't think anyone is prepared for the hell on Earth of a full strategic nuclear exchange.
There exists bombs with > 4000x power of those dropped on Hiroshima.
Also Russia modernised their intercontinental missiles and now they are able to carry multiple warheads that split before impact.
