[chipsa]

Strategically, the ICBM fields are warhead sponges. Each one only has a single warhead, but you'd want to target each of the silos, plus each of the launch control centers with more than one warhead, in order to keep them from launching. So a missile squadron would get hit with something on the order of 110 warheads in order to keep 50 warheads from launching.

But there are other strategic targets in or near cities. And those, it goes from having 2 warheads each, to havine 20+2 warheads each. So for the cities that don't get defended, it really sucks. But now instead of 1550 warheads hitting ~750 targets, it's 1550 warheads hitting ~75 targets. Because the attacker doesn't know what's going to survive to the target and has to choose their top targets that must get plastered.

Except it's worse: AEGIS BMD ships can launch from pierside. They don't have the range to defend the entire US but do for about half the US. So that's another wrench in attacker's plans (exactly how many SM-3 can hit depends on how many missiles are available at that time, which is a much more difficult thing to determine than the number of GMD interceptors).

MAD isn't a military doctrine. You won't see it on any doctrine publication of any service. The problem is the "Mutual" part. We don't want to die for our country. We want the other poor bastards to die for there. It's merely "Assured Destruction".