[crucialfelix]

Nobody can use Nuclear bombs without serious repercussions.

Putin considered using new, smaller tactical nukes on Ukraine and that set off huge international opposition. The mere mention of nukes is extremely counter productive to whatever a state is trying to accomplish.

By some estimates Israel dropped 4 Hiroshimas worth of explosives on Gaza.

https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/the-israeli-destruction...

The US dropped far more destruction on Bagdad in 2003 than on Hiroshima.

Modern conventional bombing is far more effective and just as hideous.

[notpushkin]

I think governments are afraid of nukes not because of the destructive power. Nukes are the only weapons that put the actual people in charge in danger, not just the civilians or the military. People in charge are afraid for their lives, not for the people they are supposed to protect.

It’s a simplisic view, I know.

[westmeal]

The senators and president will be OK, they have plans to evac to a huge bunker with everything they need. I don't know about you but I don't seem to have a taxpayer funded mega bunker.

[asvitkine]

For some definition of OK. It would be a big negative change to their lifestyles even if they're still alive.

Also, it assumes they can get to those locations in time from wherever they happen to be.

[kelipso]

A lot of their families and friends are not going to be in the bunkers.

[dworkr]

They'll have no one left to pander to.

[wruza]

I don’t find it simplistic, but realistic. Their asses are pretty safe and they can play their soldier games from the deep bunkers until the atom starts speaking. People in charge are rarely heroes and everything revolves around their safety, by design.

[smw]

What type of people are neither citizens or the military?