So is there a category that is neither strategic nor tactical? (Various US systems were >500 km but not able to hit Moscow.)

we will open soon for questions and comments

You too Tom!

Im sorry, but i need to drop off. This is a really interesting work, David. Congrats

Is there a significant but hidden variable here- of patron nuclear warhead numbers : adversary nuclear numbers (ie relative strategic superiority or its absence )? This presumably psychologically salient ratio might often be associated with diversity of delivery systems but would not be identical with platform diversification.

All nuke scholars need to change that then

(in pol science)

Dennis Healey the British chap

Matt's point about the gap between deterring adversaries and reassuring allies gets at why I think this is a rather "easy" demonstration of the importance of platform diversification. But I think that it's okay to explore easier one(s) as a first cut for a research note.

Rebecca -- Yes, it's interesting (and dismaying) how language blunders persist and propagate. (Webster is completely clear on penetrative versus penetrable.) Cheers, John

And yet, extended deterrence has worked for decades, which is puzzling. I think it works because adversaries understand the fog of war: if you get in a big fight with a U.S. ally, there’s some risk that things will get out of control one way or another (as they almost did in the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I don't think the model claims to capture all that matters to deterrence ; credibility is another major independent variable that needs to be factored in any analysis

Al's and Steve's comments run somewhat close to my question- Could it be that France and Israel were just some American or UK platform diversification away from forgoing the nuclear capabilities they developed? That's probably an unfair question because you are finding a marginal effect; just something to keep in mind from the more qualitative-minded among us going forward.

David, I enjoyed the talk very much. Great to see the progress you’ve made on the project!

Thank you David for this very clear presentation and well structured design research!

Great work David!

Thank you! :)