Deterrence was a dialogue of the blind with the deaf. It was largely a bargain we in the West made with ourselves. Deterrence was also flawed in that the consequences of its failure were intolerable. While the price of undeterred aggression in the age of uniquely conventional weaponry could be severe, history teaches that nations can survive and even prosper in the aftermath of unconditional defeat. Not so in the nuclear age.
Nuclear weapons give no quarter.
Their effects transcend time and space, poisoning the earth and deforming its inhabitants for generations. They leave us without defense, expunge all hope for meaningful survival. They hold in their sway not just the fate of nations but the very meaning of civilization. Deterrence failed completely as a guide for setting rational limits on the size and composition of military forces. The appetite of deterrence theory was voracious, its capacity to justify new weapons and large stocks unrestrained.