[whakim]

I'm not sure it'd change the calculus for the UK or France because they are NATO members which effectively ensures their second strike capability. (It certainly might change the cost/benefit calculation on building submarines, though!) Israel probably doesn't even subscribe to a second strike doctrine given that the potential adversaries they're trying to deter don't even have nuclear weapons.

[ceejayoz]

Israel does subscribe to a second strike doctrine. They’re quite publicly worried about Iran getting nukes.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/open-secret-israeli...

[DiogenesKynikos]

France has made a deliberate point of not relying on NATO, and instead maintaining its own nuclear arsenal.

If the Cold War had turned hot, the Soviet plan was to drive to the Rhine and then negotiate, on the theory that the US might sacrifice West Germany, but that France would definitely retaliate on its own.

[wbl]

Pakistan does have nuclear weapons and the risk of them transferring them to an Islamic fundamentalist trying to rid the middle east of Jews is nonzero.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the risk of them transferring them to an Islamic fundamentalist trying to rid the middle east of Jews is nonzero

You’re describing an undeterrable actor.