Talk:Strategic Nuclear Triad
The nuclear triad is a good example on many levels how language operates. The term was developed by arms control negotiators to divide delivery systems of nukes into 3 categories, air, land, and sea, to facilitate discussion. These discussions took many years, decades to reach agreement. Each side of the negotiating table had their own nuclear triad which constantly, daily was being upgraded with technological innovations. The goal of the negotiators was to put a limit or cap on the deployment of weapons. Technological innovation and development was allowed to proceed (which can't really be stopped or prevented) at the drawing board level, but was forbidden to enter the production level and eventual deployment.
Today we have 30 years of innovative research on weapons that were massed produced in the 1980s prior to dissolution of the USSR sitting on the drawing board shelf, awaiting production, testing, and deployment. As well as unfettered research on new technology, like AI, which has the ability to decide to kill people without human intervention.
The reason I make this note is due to hybrid, asymmetrical information war that has been conducted for many years. Many propagandists try to imply the that the US has a monopoly with a "Strategic Nuclear Triad" that one-ups the Russians. It does not. Both sides recognized a relative parity when the agreements were signed. The 1988 INF treaty was a key factor in the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. When the US withdrew from the arrangement in 2002, that greenlighted to the Russians to move ahead with Iskander & Oreshnik development and production. The US may have moved ahead with its own development of 5G warfare - which includes biological, information/propaganda warfare development and deployment with less of a focus on conventional & nuclear weapons. That's why the US has no hypersonic missiles or defense against Oreshnik. Rest assured, the Russians have their own response on the drawing board to US production and deployment in the information war since internet was developed by DARPA, Google, Facebook and others, This does not necessarily mean just countering Western propaganda with their own propaganda.
A single Kinzhal for example can wipe out the US banking, travel, and communications industries with a strike on satellites, wreaking havoc on Americans everyday life who have come to depend on internet. The US has done nothing to upgrade its defenses against such strikes since it cancelled the INF treaty. Under international law, such a strike could be considered "necessary and proportionate" to all the neocon and neo-Nazi provocations and Russophobia spread by internet (toilets and gay bath houses, for example). Remember, NAZI war criminal Alfred Rosenberg was hanged by the United States and Soviet Union for practicing his God-given First Amendment human right of free speech. So there are international laws, agreements, and precedents against spreading false information and hate speech. RobSZelensky Must Go! 19:31, June 4, 2025 (EDT)