Prussian Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke the Elder wrote, “No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy’s main strength,” which is frequently bastardized as “No plan survives contact with the enemy.” I’m old enough to remember when debates in the United States were all about matching the Soviets in warheads, weapons, and delivery systems. The impetus was less deterrence than it was being able to fight the USSR on the European battlefield. It all made sense, if you thought a nuclear war was a winnable thing. It was as though we could actually plan out a war that included using nuclear weapons, and somehow emerge victorious.
We have used nuclear weapons in war, and emerged victorious, but that is because the enemy didn’t have them, and because his plan to knock out the American fleet at Pearl Harbor did not survive first contact with the enemy. Yes, the Japanese attack sank four battleships and seriously damaged four more, also sinking or damaging three cruisers, three destroyers, an anti-aircraft training ship, and a minelayer. There were no aircraft carriers in port, and the wrath of our country was raised, and our industrial might undamaged.
Now, with Donald Trump having won the 2024 election, and his great reticence to get involved in the Russo-Ukrainian War, our European allies in NATO are revisiting notions of, as Major Kong put it, “Nuclear combat, toe-to-toe with the Russkies.”
Dropping tactical nuclear weapons was a major strategic error. We must correct it
We 
