You probably should have said “foolproof countermeasure” if you really just wanted to remove nukes as a factor to see what happens.
But you said “foolproof deterrent” and now you’re quibbling at people over whether a psychological deterrent can actually be foolproof.
Maybe not, but then your question is nonsensical. The fact is that we are already using guaranteed total destruction of the world as a deterrent and it has so far worked. What more deterrence are you even suggesting we might add to that???
We already have it, they’re called nuclear bombs, and MAD.
How is that fool proof?
This points to a flaw in your question.
You probably should have said “foolproof countermeasure” if you really just wanted to remove nukes as a factor to see what happens.
But you said “foolproof deterrent” and now you’re quibbling at people over whether a psychological deterrent can actually be foolproof.
Maybe not, but then your question is nonsensical. The fact is that we are already using guaranteed total destruction of the world as a deterrent and it has so far worked. What more deterrence are you even suggesting we might add to that???
“The nuclear arms race is like two sworn enemies standing waist deep in gasoline, one with three matches, the other with five.”
― Carl Sagan
It is proof that humans are fools
Hasn’t failed yet (yes I know that’s the survivorship bias fallacy)