Why M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) is Obsolete, Totally Invalid

M.A.D. is invalid for Russia has found a way to hit us,
but prevent us from retaliating effectively.
That is recipe for a one-sided war, unilateral destruction,
Rather than a two-sided, "mutual ..destruction."
 
Our nuclear arsenal is retaliatory in nature.
Just the threat of our retaliating is supposed to be enuff to deter Russia from attacking.
Hence it is called our Nuclear Deterrent.
Evidently it really has struck FEAR into the Kremlin.  
For 7 decades have passed without Russian Attack.
 
Why is that about to change dramatically, devastatingly ??!!
Our Nuclear Deterrent is called our TRIAD, for it is made up of 3 parts:
1)our ICBMs, 2)our strategic bombers, 3)our "boomer' submarines.
It has always been "the Holy Grail".from the Soviet or Russian POV  
to find a way to destroy all three "legs" of our Nuclear Triad,
In other words, to win nuclear war and to overthrow the doctrine of M.A.D.
 
All the Kremlin has to do is negate those 3 things: 1)our ICBMs,
2)our Bombers, 3)our subs.
Here's how they have succeeded at doing the "impossible,"  
and therefor nuclear war lies ahead for an unprepared America,  
a decadent society distracted by piddling little things like Islamic terrorism.
 
Exhibit A: under Reagan, Bush senior, Clinton and finally Bush junior,  
we disarmed from a high of 39 "boomer" subs down to just 14 subs,  
really only 12 subs are being used.
That's a more than 2/3 reduction - in response to Gorbachev making a false peace, ending the Cold War,
Actually exchanging the overt Cold War for a stealth Cold War,
(Which has recently reverted to an overt Cold War.
See footnote #1)
 
Exhibit B: Bush senior took our Strategic bombers off "alert" status.way back in the early 1990s.
They had been ready to take off within the "6 minutes" it takes missiles from Russian subs to reach them.
But now they are sitting ducks.I'm talking our B52s, our B1s and 2/3 of our B2 stealth bombers.
We only have 18 B2s. Only 1/3 of our B2s are still on "alert." But those six B2s are just not enuff to deter Russian Attack.
Not only that, even the armaments they carry is inadequate, no 1-megaton warheads.more like the equivalent of 150,000 tons of TNT.
 
Exhibit C, Bill Clinton changed our policy as to when to retaliate with our ICBMs
after Russian Attack.
It had been to launch immediately after ANY indication that Russian Attack was beginning.
Clinton changed that policy to "wait until the Russian Attack has been verified"
So as to prevent socalled "accidental nuclear war."
 As the socalled "fall of Communism" in Russia led to the conclusion that
INTENTIONAL nuclear war was no longer likely,
"Accidental nuclear war" became the boogey man, the "real" danger.
 
The problem with this delay in launching our ICBMs is what?  
It means we will LOSE our ICBMs before we can launch them.
In an actual Russian Attack we would have like 6 minutes to launch.
If it takes 3 minutes to verify such a surprise attack,
And another  minute for the President to press the keys to launch our retaliatory strike, plus a minute for the soldiers operating our ICBMs to do their part,
Well, you can see the implications.
Long story short, our new policy has been to WRITE OFF our ICBMs,
Think of what I'm saying here !! We are literally disarming defacto,
without calling it such.
Instead of having a valid Triad, we are settling for a monad, one-legged  
retaliatory arsenal.
For, without our ICBMs and Bombers,  all we really have to threaten the Kremlin with is our boomer subs.
 
The rationale behind this discounting of our ICBMs is that we have enuff submarine-launched missiles to deter Russia.
So we have to maintain a robust number of boomer subs - to compensate for the ICBMs that we are in effect giving up, ok ??
Our sub-launched missiles are doing "double-duty," so to speak.
but instead of keeping our subs, we have irrationally reduced them by (more than) two-thirds !! They were 39 subs, now they are just 12 subs !!
That's totally unforgivable. But that's not all.
 
Exhibit D - We discount the danger of Russian ABMs, which are  
Interceptor missiles called anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs)
Even if Russia can bomb our ICBMs in their silos, and our bombers in their hangars, and our subs in port, which = 1/3 of our 12 subs,  the threat of our 1200 or so warheads ejected from our 8 subs at sea,
the threat to use them would STILL be enuff to deter Russian Attack !!
 
Except for one thing - Russian ABMs, there are thousands of them,
enuff to shoot down 1,300 incoming warheads.
This is according to William T. Lee,an ex-CIA analyst who specialized in the Soviet military.
("Russia as the World's Number One nuclear Arsenal," Washington Times, 1/30/96).
The ABM Treaty of 1972-73 limited the USA and the USSR to just 200 ABMs each.
So why have we let Russia build THOUSANDS of ABMs, totally in violation of that foundation of the US/Russian balance of power ??!!
It's because our CIA is foolish enuff, naive enuff to be duped by Russian trickery.
 
Russia repeatedly tested their ABMs by flying a dummy warhead across Russia, east to west. Then the ABM would to launched to shoot down that dummy warhead. It failed every single time.  
Our spy satellites were monitoring the tests, naturally.
Our CIA has concluded that Russian ABMs are no threat to us,  
totally worthless as anti-missile missiles, adequate only as anti-aircraft missiles.
THAT is why we let Russia cheat on the ABM Treaty with impunity !!!
 
But Dr Angelo Codevilla, an expert on Russian ABMs, an ex-aide to former Senator Wallop of Wyoming,  writing in Commentary magazine, in the late 1980s, says, "of course the ABMs failed to intercept their targets.  
For the Soviets knew our spy satellites were monitoring the testing."
 It would be to their advantage to rig the tests so as to convince us of the ABMs' incompetence.
That way Russia could get away with building thousands of them  
without America blowing the whistle on their cheating.
 
More than that, if Russia can shoot down 1,300 warheads,  
we need to start with 1,300 warheads as a baseline,  
with the first 1,300 acting as zero.
Whatever number of warheads we need to destroy targets in Russia,
that number needs to be in addition to the first 1,300 warheads  
(that Russia can shoot down).
But by our childish dismissing of Russian ABMs as harmless,  
we fail to have the extra 1,300 warheads we need  
just to use up Russia's interception capability.  
 
In short, if a hypothetical Russian Attack could reduce  
our retaliatory arsenal to just 1,150 warheads
(that's the number on missiles on our subs),  
but Russia's nationwide ABM system can shoot down 1,300 incoming warheads,  
we literally have no retaliatory arsenal at all.
This is the math:
1,150 incoming US warheads minus 1,300 warheads
(the number that Russian ABMs can shoot down)
adds up to less than zero warheads.
At that point, assuming the Kremlin can do the math,
we are, in effect, INVITING Russian Attack.
Footnote #1: if the Kremlin plans on attacking America they dont want the Russian public sympathizing with the USA afterward.So the Kremlin is now demonizing the West especially the USA !!!
They want their people to respond with "America deserved it."