# Your thoughts on whether a limited nuclear exchange is possible and/or feasible **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 21, 2026, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833 "2026-07-21T17:35:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 8:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/21 "2026-07-22T08:55:43Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Israel certainly can’t be immediately flattened with conventional weapons, and probably doesn’t have nukes, either. > **[Israel and nuclear weapons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_nuclear_weapons)** > > Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons. Estimates of Israel's stockpile range from 90 to 400 warheads, and the country is believed to possess a nuclear triad of delivery options by air, land, and sea. Its first deliverable nuclear weapon is estimated to have been completed in late 1966 or early 1967, which would have made it the sixth of nine nuclear-armed countries. Israel's nuclear weapons delivery systems are estimated to include between 25 and 100 of the Jericho series of med... ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/22 "2026-07-22T14:20:39Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Israel certainly can’t be immediately flattened with conventional weapons, and probably doesn’t have nukes, either. Israel worked with France in the 50s and 60s to build nukes. They’ve had nukes since 1967, they just don’t advertise them. Also the link @Smapti provided shows the UK and Norway also secretly provided aid to Israel’s nuclear weapons program. My impression is during the cold war a lot of arab states sided with the USSR and Israel sided with the west. I have no idea if they were using Israel as a nuclear proxy against the USSR in the region or if that is why western nations helped Israel build nukes. ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/23 "2026-07-22T14:58:54Z")
My scenario is a small nuclear power, with maybe 10-20 warheads, that uses one weapon to forestall an attack by a neighbor. Nuke the army in the field, and make it clear that if that doesn’t end it, you have some more where that came from. With only a few warheads, no one has to worry about the “Assured Destruction” of one or more Major Powers, so the US, Russia et al. won’t feel an existential threat that requires immediate response. There will also be less of an inclination to “punish them” if they’re not the initial aggressor state - they were trying to defend themselves against a preemptive attack. And they can reasonably claim that they have no interest in nuking anyone else, and only nuked the first country due to massive provocations. Think of Ukraine at the start of the war with Russia. Had they had a few nukes leftover from their Soviet days, and had used one to nuke Russia’s army, would anyone other that Russia have done anything? And would Russia escalate to nuking Ukraine, when they know Ukraine had a few more nukes ready to blow up Moscow? ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/24 "2026-07-22T15:03:39Z")
And I thought of another possibility: What if a nuclear power nukes themselves? A dictator has a few nukes. There’s a rebellion that’s largely confined to one or two cities, remote enough from key governmental assets that the cities could be nuked without ruining the rest of the country. If the rebellion can’t be suppressed with conventional forces, I could see the dictator deciding to just wipe them off the map. If Putin had nuked the Wagner mercenaries when they first seized Rostov-on-Don, would the rest of the world have nuked Russia because Russia had nuked Russia? ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/25 "2026-07-22T15:13:16Z")
The various chemical attacks that Assad perpetrated against the rebellious cities and regions in Syria are a pretty good proxy for this last scenario. And although the escalatory nature of nukes is larger than from chemicals due to the much longer and more distant residual effects, the rest of the world pretty much watched and jawed. Nobody else thought _this_ outrage was the one to end all outrages and deserved a decapitating response. ---
**Author:** ![Calder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e99b99/32.png) [@Calder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Calder)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/26 "2026-07-22T18:22:36Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Much of the problem being that the military/civilian distinction is largely imaginary due to how large the area of effect of nuclear weapons is; striking military targets destroys cities and towns _anyway._ Not necessarily. The nightmare retaliation scenario for the US is if a carrier battle group at sea got nuked. It would strictly be a military target with no civilian casualties. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/27 "2026-07-22T18:34:32Z")
What if you had an increasingly desperate nuclear power losing a war to a non-nuclear power? I could see resorting to nuclear weapons in order to regain the upper hand. The non-nuclear power couldn’t retaliate, but the horrified rest of the world might be able to limit the engagement. ---
**Author:** ![ricepad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b38774/32.png) [@ricepad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ricepad)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2026, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/28 "2026-07-22T18:47:25Z")
That desperation is what I think will escalate any conflict beyond ‘limited’. ---
**Author:** ![willthekittensurvive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/91b2a8/32.png) [@willthekittensurvive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/willthekittensurvive)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2026, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/29 "2026-07-23T09:18:17Z")
I’m not sure if it is still the current doctrine, but there were some reports that Pakistan reserved the right to nuke its own (border) country to stop an Indian incursion of ground troops.. edit now with source > **[WHAT IS THE COLD START DOCTRINE AND WHY PAKISTAN IS "SHIT SCARED" OF IT - ISSF](https://issf.org.in/2026/02/what-is-the-cold-start-doctrine-and-why-pakistan-is-shit-scared-of-it/)** > > By the end of 2025, the way things work in South Asia's geopolitical landscape changed a lot. This major shift was mainly caused by a deep change in how the > The Nasr is a solid-fueled, short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) with a range of approximately **60 kilometers**. It is designed to carry a low-yield (sub-kiloton to 5 kiloton) nuclear warhead. > > - **Doctrinal Purpose:** The Nasr is a battlefield weapon. Pakistan’s doctrine envisions using it against advancing Indian armored columns on Pakistani soil. > > This points to a rather desperate strategy, only Pakistan can think of: **nuking one’s own territory to stop an invasion.** > > - **The Strategic Calculation:** Pakistan believes that using a “small” nuke on its own soil against military targets would not provoke a massive Indian strategic nuclear response against Pakistani cities, thus “plugging the gap” in deterrence. Extra edit, source is from an Indian think-tank not sure how reliable it is… ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2026, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/30 "2026-07-23T09:44:34Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > What if you had an increasingly desperate nuclear power losing a war to a non-nuclear power? I could see resorting to nuclear weapons in order to regain the upper hand. The non-nuclear power couldn’t retaliate, but the horrified rest of the world might be able to limit the engagement. That is (vaguely, roughly) analogous to what Israel tried in 1973: > Dayan in the morning of 7 October called Shalhevet Freier, the director-general of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, to a meeting with Golda Meir to discuss the possible arming of nuclear weapons. Meir rejected this option. Existent nukes or not, mentioning the N-word was supposed to spur the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate an end to the war. This worked, but, on the other hand, bluff or not, the USSR was not about to let Israel get away with _actually_ using nuclear weapons and sent tactical nukes to Egypt: [https://www.nytimes.com/1973/11/22/archives/officials-suspect-russians-sent-atom-arms-to-egypt-atomic-weapons.html](https://www.nytimes.com/1973/11/22/archives/officials-suspect-russians-sent-atom-arms-to-egypt-atomic-weapons.html) The US, in response, went to DEFCON 3… So, rather than “limiting the engagement”, it could have gone to Global Thermonuclear War. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Duality](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.duality/32/4098_2.png) [@Mr.Duality](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Duality)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2026, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/31 "2026-07-23T11:57:05Z")
Limited nuclear war is extremely unlikely. See the book [Nuclear War: a scenario](https://www.amazon.com/Nuclear-War-Scenario-Annie-Jacobsen-ebook/dp/B0CBGWMFSN/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3L5WZ6GBSDI4L&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ywBawHIPckmNSxpnpDP1dfZ0uWwoLAuLDGVAlsqXc8HrPD5jMiCAc7asbhkIkIKiTXIhXci8LeivYBoBUhF_SPlvJPwYGM6NHF_pZqwE9tSfdQsda24lQVp_jqQMb6B-1uvHghDGtUXfxEcJlcMCOpy6Jp88CF034id8zf6lLKnYbm5pVLChohp3ac5iUHE9PlXX3T3PDs34X9f7wi6uK7w0qbRWv8K4dt4r7dXFU74.LJlyY2VhI09Q7Sq7XeFUHgj2AN2-5gjX_Jn3aQx-1bQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=nuclear+war+a+scenario&qid=1784807416&sprefix=nuclear+war%2Caps%2C260&sr=8-1). It’s very well researched. Interesting fact- nuclear winter would not be just a few months long. To give you a perspective, nothing north of Kansas would see temperatures above freezing for fourteen years. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2026, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/32 "2026-07-23T12:20:43Z")
> [@Calder](#): > > On the other hand, I don’t think there is any chance the US or Europe would have responded with nukes if Russia had used a tactical nuke in Ukraine. We would have responded in a different way. By now, I think it is clear that the US, Europe, and especially China have made it known to Putin that the costs outweigh the benefits. I think there’s one possible scenario, which just popped into my head the other day, in which they might be used. If Putin gets desperate enough, he might try a false flag using a small nuke in some part of Russia he doesn’t especially care for. He’d blame Ukrainian terrorists for having stolen and then used the nuke on Russian territory, and nuke Kyiv in response as “fair retaliation”. I don’t think this is likely, but it is possible. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2026, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/33 "2026-07-23T12:41:35Z")
> [@willthekittensurvive](#): > > I’m not sure if it is still the current doctrine, but there were some reports that Pakistan reserved the right to nuke its own (border) country to stop an Indian incursion of ground troops.. As you say, consider the source. But I don’t see any legit reason for their sneering comment “… only Pakistan can think of …”. NATO fully intended to use battlefield nukes on West German soil after the Warsaw Pact had pushed through both the Inner German (East/West Germany) border and the front lines of NATO’s armies. Putting the brakes on an impending rout is exactly what a defensive-oriented country has battlefield nukes for. Which pretty well ensures they’ll be used on what was your territory, only now occupied by your enemy. Conversely, an offensive-oriented country will intend to use its battlefield nukes on the enemy territory that they then intend to occupy while still hot. Said another way, no matter who among the Warsaw Pact or NATO was going to use battlefield nukes, West Germany was going to take it in the neck. Due to their small geographical size, Pakistan is, of necessity, in the same boat if invaded for real. Now how plausible an actual India - Pakistan war is, versus just a simmering battle of bogey-manning one another for domestic political gain is a big topic I’m not qualified to address. ---
**Author:** ![Dark\_Sponge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dark_sponge/32/121_2.png) [@Dark\_Sponge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dark_Sponge)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2026, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/34 "2026-07-24T21:50:47Z")
Yes, as long as the attack is not threatening the existence of a nation I think it is possible. This would, of course, be a war crime, but say a nation threatened to “poison” a rural, disputed area between it and its enemy by launching a single warhead in order to create a buffer zone. Later, the entire world witnesses this country launch a single missile toward their declared target. There are a few rural towns there but no major population centers. Everyone knows the nation still has the majority of their nuclear stockpile ready to go. How does the enemy nation and rest of the world respond? By launching everything at them in an all-out nuclear attack? I doubt it. I’m sure there would be a response, probably a nuclear one, but I don’t think this would trigger WW3. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2026, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/35 "2026-07-25T10:52:49Z")
> [@Dark\_Sponge](#): > > Everyone knows the nation still has the majority of their nuclear stockpile ready to go. How does the enemy nation and rest of the world respond? By launching everything at them in an all-out nuclear attack? I doubt it. The target probably would be; if they don’t, they invite another nuclear attack, and another, and another until they are either all dead or fire whatever they have left _anyway._ There’s also the issue that the targeted nation can’t be sure if the missile will change targets in flight. I’d give good odds that they’d fire everything, and do it before the incoming missile landed. ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2026, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/36 "2026-07-25T12:01:36Z")
> [@Dark\_Sponge](#): > > Later, the entire world witnesses this country launch a single missile toward their declared target. And this is the other thing that always drives me nuts about these kinds of discussions. _You don’t need a missile in this scenario_. Hell, you don’t even need to drop a bomb from a plane. If you’re nuking your own border areas, either to stop an invading army, or to deny the area as suggested here, you could deliver the nuke on the back of a truck. Nuclear landmines are actually a thing. > **[Atomic demolition munition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_demolition_munition)** > > Atomic demolition munitions (ADMs), colloquially known as nuclear land mines, are small nuclear explosive devices. ADMs were developed for both military and civilian purposes. As weapons, they were designed to be exploded in the forward battle area, in order to block or channel enemy forces. Non-militarily, they were designed for demolition, mining or earthmoving. Apart from testing, however, they have never been used for either purpose. Instead of being delivered to the target by missiles, rock... ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2026, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/37 "2026-07-25T16:30:19Z")
The earliest fictional representation of an all-out nuclear bomb exchange ([written in November 1945](https://etherwave.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/louis-ridenours-pilot-lights-of-the-apocalypse-1945/)) didn’t involve missiles or planes - every nation had (or was suspected of having) hidden bombs in other nation’s cities, to be set off by radio when needed. An earthquake in San Francisco is interpreted as a bombing, so the US sets off a bomb in Denmark (a minor dispute existed between the US and Denmark in the play) leading to Denmark hitting Sweden, and so on. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2026, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/38 "2026-07-25T20:59:03Z")
There is a handy guide! ☹ > **[FM5-26%281971%29.pdf](https://ia800501.us.archive.org/17/items/fm-5-26-1971/FM5-26%281971%29.pdf)** > > 4.27 MB ---
**Author:** ![Dark\_Sponge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dark_sponge/32/121_2.png) [@Dark\_Sponge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dark_Sponge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2026, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/39 "2026-07-27T17:31:47Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The target probably would be; if they don’t, they invite another nuclear attack, and another, and another until they are either all dead or fire whatever they have left _anyway._ There’s also the issue that the targeted nation can’t be sure if the missile will change targets in flight. > > I’d give good odds that they’d fire everything, and do it before the incoming missile landed. I disagree. I realize some probably live in fear that people are just itching to fire nukes, but I think that’s the opposite of the current situation, in almost every country. In my scenario, this is a disputed, rural territory in-between the two countries, with both countries claiming ownership. The “aggressor” country has already announced it will fire a nuke at a territory it claims as its own. It knows it will piss off the other country, but is doing so as a calculated risk. If the enemy now attempts to invade through the nuked territory it has to deal with radiation, not to mention the aggressor country can just nuke the same territory again. The other country knows as soon as it launches everything the aggressor country will launch its full nuclear arsenal at them, minus one nuke. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2026, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833/40 "2026-07-27T17:49:28Z")
But this “one-on-one” scenario seems to ignore allies, enemies and interested (self and otherwise) countries. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-thoughts-on-whether-a-limited-nuclear-exchange-is-possible-and-or-feasible/1031833.md?page=3)