It is my duty to inform you presenting anything related to China and its behaviors is verboten.

Let me explain. Because Xi smiles and appears friendly, we must discount his true aims. Putin has a stern face; therefore must be perceived as a bad guy.

Making it simple:
China = good
Russia= bad bad bad

They have lived with their hysterically screaming of Russia for so many years, it cannot be given up.

My work here is done.

I found this on the internet.
This guy was talking about how the doctrine of MAD was becoming outdated.
What are some thoughts about this?

The whole idea of MAD, which stands for Mutual Assured Destruction, has this kind of retro, Cold War vibe to it, doesn't it? It's like a throwback to those tense times when the big players, especially the USA and the USSR, basically had this unspoken agreement: "If you launch your nukes at me, I'll launch mine at you, and we'll all go down together." It worked, in a grim way, because it was based on the logic that no rational actor would want to initiate a conflict that ends in their own annihilation.

But saying MAD is becoming outdated is like saying flip phones aren't the go-to mobile device anymore. The world has changed—a lot. First off, the number of players on the nuclear field has increased. It's not just a two-party standoff anymore. With countries like North Korea, India, and Pakistan in the nukes club, the dynamics have shifted. The more players you have, the harder it becomes to predict everyone's moves, increasing the risk that someone might miscalculate.

Technology has also changed the game. Advances in missile defense systems might tilt the scale, giving some nations the false confidence that they could intercept incoming nukes, potentially making them bolder. But, let's be real, missile defense isn't a foolproof umbrella, especially against a full-scale launch.

Then there's the whole shift towards cyber warfare and hybrid warfare tactics. Countries might engage in cyberattacks on nuclear facilities or use misinformation to destabilize regions without ever having to resort to launching a nuke. It's like warfare has become more about poking the opponent in various ways to see where they're most vulnerable, instead of just threatening them with the big, nuclear stick.

Lastly, there's a generational shift in thinking. The Cold War generation, which directly felt the terror of the nuclear shadow, is gradually stepping back. Younger generations might not view nuclear war with the same level of existential dread, possibly diluting the psychological deterrence of MAD. Or, paradoxically, their detachment might lead to a reevaluation of nuclear weapons’ role in international relations, pushing towards disarmament or novel forms of deterrence.

In essence, MAD is kind of like a vintage car. It's a classic, it had its time when it was the pinnacle of deterrence theory, but in today's complex, technologically advanced, and multipolar world, it just doesn't fit the streets anymore. The global strategic environment is calling for new thinking, more suited to the diverse, interconnected challenges of the 21st century.

I would hope that he is bluffing.
The Soviet people have suffered much more the past hundred years than American has.
I believe they could more likely survive a nuclear strike than we could.
They are used to a lot of hardships.
They are a country that has promoted a godless ideologies for decades so they cannot be relied on for anything other than a very bad outcome.
The United States is now on the road to boot God out of every facet of what made America great. I see America facing a bleak future also if we cannot restore some semblance of a representative government back to the founders intentions.

Any nuclear exchange involving 100's of detonation is not going to be limited to damage in the countries involved. Besides the world wide spread of radiation and changes in weather patterns (ex. nuclear winter) disruptions to communication, trade, travel etc. would effect everybody. This would include essentials such as food and fuel. Even having a rad meter might not help much. It can tell you if a potential food/water source is contaminated, but would do nothing to fill your belly or quench your thirst.