Originally Posted by
West Coast
Whats more effective at preventing WWIII, the UN or the concept of MAD?
A bit of both. The UN is the child of the Peace of Westphalia, the Metternich System, the League of Nations, and a few other attempts by the Powers of the World to find other means of political leverage and suasion than the very expensive and destructive tool of politics that is war - in particular the industrial age version of intramural homicide that is war. (Called by Keegan if I recall, "the war by machine" phase of mankind's predilection to kill one another in organized groups).
The political calculus of what risk and what reward, on the balance, makes heading to war a political choice for sure
was impacted by the very high cost of MAD. MAD didn't prevent various powers from using armed force, but it did prevent them from using it on each other, which is what WW III would, or will, look like. The Powers of the world going after each other.