Nukes in this day and age seem to me like they should effectively be obsolete. I feel like in the age of satellite observation and the idea of geo-privacy being basically null, every developed country ought to have anti icbm tech, similar to an mrap. Short of mass amounts of dirty bombs, I feel like nuclear war should be a non issue in modern times.
In: 51
>why isn’t the world set up to kill nukes in the air?
I don’t understand your question. The world **IS** set up to kill nukes in the air. The Russians, the Chinese, the Israelis, the Indians, and, of course, the US all have anti-ballistic missile systems, as do Japan, the UK, France, and Italy.
You may have heard of Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (a.k.a *Star Wars*). It was a program designed to develop high energy lasers and other “beam weapons” to knock out nuclear missiles. There are even satellite based anti-missile systems.
You may also have heard of the Cruise Missile. The point behind a cruise missile is for the missile to fly an erratic, unpredictable course to the target. It does this specifically so that it can avoid anti-missile defences.
The problem isn’t that we don’t have the technology. The problem is that no matter how good it is, it will never make the nuclear threat disappear. It only takes one nuke getting through to cause massive devastation. In fact, our current deterrent strategy, MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is designed around overwhelming and swamping any defense. “No matter how hard you nuke us, we’ll bomb you to the stone age”. Creating so effective a defense as to make nukes obsolete will create a situation where they’d be vitrually guaranteed to be used.
Latest Answers