A world without Mutual Assured Destruction

[Random]

Without the development of nukes the USA would not have been confident of being able to militarily contain the USSR - which could have led to a longer period of East-West cooperation after WW2. So no mccarthyism, no iron curtain and instead probably a raft of mixed social democratic states right across europe - very interesting imo!

 

[Azrael]

But this isn't MAD.

You're right. You'd have a chance of intercepting waves of jet-bombers, and it would be a logistical nightmare to assemble and deploy such a force. No such restrictions apply to ICBMs.

Logistics aside, conventional bombs lack the psychological terror of nukes. Nuclear warheads are incomparable in the speed and scope of their destruction. Whatever the logic, the prospect of having a city bombed for hours isn't as terrifying as having it atomized in an instant.