|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910460723603321 |
|
|
Autore |
Roberts Brad |
|
|
Titolo |
The case for U.S. nuclear weapons in the 21st century / / Brad Roberts |
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
Stanford, California : , : Stanford Security Studies, an imprint of Stanford University Press, , [2016] |
|
©2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (351 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Nuclear weapons - Government policy - United States |
Deterrence (Strategy) |
National security - United States |
Electronic books. |
United States Military policy |
United States Foreign relations 21st century |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Description based upon print version of record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
The evolution of U.S. nuclear policy and posture since the end of the Cold War -- The first new problem : nuclear-armed regional challengers -- The new regional deterrence strategy -- The second new problem : relations with Putin's Russia -- The evolving relationship with China -- Extended deterrence and strategic stability in Europe -- Extended deterrence and strategic stability in Northeast Asia -- The broader nuclear assurance agenda -- Conclusions -- Epilogue : implications for future strategy, policy, and posture reviews. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
This book is a counter to the conventional wisdom that the United States can and should do more to reduce both the role of nuclear weapons in its security strategies and the number of weapons in its arsenal. The case against nuclear weapons has been made on many grounds—including historical, political, and moral. But, Brad Roberts argues, it has not so far been informed by the experience of the United States since the Cold War in trying to adapt deterrence to a changed world, and to create the conditions that would allow further significant changes to U.S. nuclear policy and posture. Drawing on the author's |
|
|
|
|