ICBM Capabilities and Comparisons
Comments debate the strategic roles, reliability, interception difficulties, advantages, and limitations of ICBMs compared to alternatives like Starship, cruise missiles, and other delivery systems.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Do ICBMs have any practical uses besides delivering explosives?
Is it true that a single icbm cannot be intercepted?
ICBMs are like nation-scale guns. Once you're at a certain level of technology, they don't need any more upgrades. They are proven technology and reliable. They can do a shitton of damage. They are best left unused. You can't reliably defend against them. And if you have them, even just one, others are reluctant to fuck with you.
ICBMs are gonna have collateral damage
There's really no reason. ICBM's are just as good and carry less political risk
ICBMs don't move around... so they are easily targeted themselves.
ICBM seem like a good deterrent compared to infantry and animal-carried weapons
This bit is specifically about ICBM's, presumably they will be targeted when they are outside of the atmosphere.
What advantage does this have over ICBMs?
ICBMs can't be used against mobile targets like ships. High balletic arcs and travel times measured in the tens of minutes means anything that can move will easily do so. And judging by Russia's current military louadout, every warhead fancy enough to actually manuever to compensate either only exists on paper or partially disassembled in a Moscow lab