Turkish Military Stance in Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean

[Zafer]

The way it looks to me, its inevitable that most nations on earth will get nuclear weapons at some point. It may take 50 years, it may take 200 years. But the idea that nukes will remain in a few hands indefinitely is unrealistic.

The real question is, will a nation like Turkiye lose first before getting them. A good example is Ukraine, she gave her nukes up and as a result she ended up facing a full on Russian invasion, that may one day completely annex the nation.

Another example of losing first was Russia threatening us over our interventions in Syria with things like nuclear strikes. They first had the crazy one whose clearly an agent of the Russian government threatened to nuke istanbul. Then once it looked like it wasnt going to deter us, Putin started actively talking about using tactical nukes against us. Have we been losing in the sense that we didn't pursue our interests fully because of fear of nuclear strike. Those threats would have been meaningless to us had we had our arsenal.

Had we had a nuclear arsenal with ballistic strike capability, would we have pursued our regional interests more aggressively and successfully. If the answer is yes, then we are losing already by not having them.

We haven't yet been in a situation where we could benefit greatly had we have nukes. Having nukes will not automatically bring the upper-hand in conflicts but it will be an insurance policy against excessive reaction. We need to have all other leverages in our arsenal before we finally benefit from having nukes. We are still at 83% self reliance in defense sector, once we get past 90% we can look at nuclear weapons. This can happen in 7 years.

 

[BaburKhan]

We haven't yet been in a situation where we could benefit greatly had we have nukes. Having nukes will not automatically bring the upper-hand in conflicts but it will be an insurance policy against excessive reaction. We need to have all other leverages in our arsenal before we finally benefit from having nukes. We are still at 83% self reliance in defense sector, once we get past 90% we can look at nuclear weapons. This can happen in 7 years.

You're right, it's important to have the key Technologies first. What bring Nukes without a credible second Strike Capabillity, MIRV Capable Missiles, hypersonic Missiles and glide Vehicles as well ground and space based early Warning Assests.

As far as the politic Situation will change, for example the Talks about nuclaer Sharing in EU or like Iran become an nuclaer Power in near Future. We will have Threats were we need an insurance against an execesive Reaction.

For example the mutual Defence Pact between Greece and France or the nuclaer Threats from Russia in case of entering Syria.

 

[Heartbang]

You're right, it's important to have the key Technologies first. What bring Nukes without a credible second Strike Capabillity, MIRV Capable Missiles, hypersonic Missiles and glide Vehicles as well ground and space based early Warning Assests.

As far as the politic Situation will change, for example the Talks about nuclaer Sharing in EU or like Iran become an nuclaer Power in near Future. We will have Threats were we need an insurance against an execesive Reaction.

For example the mutual Defence Pact between Greece and France or the nuclaer Threats from Russia in case of entering Syria.

All this is well and good, but here's the point y'all tend to forget:

The defensive umbrellas of these nations can easily handle the few dozens of nukes states like NK tend to have.

We need to make A LOTTA nukes, or not make any at all.

An initial batch of 2000 is sufficient.

 

[Zafer]

All this is well and good, but here's the point y'all tend to forget:

The defensive umbrellas of these nations can easily handle the few dozens of nukes states like NK tend to have.

We need to make A LOTTA nukes, or not make any at all.

An initial batch of 2000 is sufficient.

I was thinking 500 will make us feel safe but what do I know.