Nuclear war, and the problem with the MAD doctrine

The MAD doctrine might sound good on paper, but I doubt any nuclear attack would play out quite that fearlessly in the real world.

People are not machines. If a leader cares even slightly about human lives, their own citizens, or even just their own survival, then they'd think very carefully before pressing the button.

Every player in a nuclear conflict knows what it means to launch one. Not only will it cause death to millions of innocents. But it means that they are likely to get one or more nukes fired back at them. No player wants to be on the receiving end of a counterstrike. So there is hesitancy to launch, even in retaliation. Every launch is *effectively* a first strike. Every individual launch creates it's own escalation, and invites it's own counterstrike.

Compare with two people hitting each other with sticks. For each blow you take, you vow to retaliate in kind. That might sound like a good deterrent in theory, but there comes a time when the pair realise that the only way to stop getting hurt is to stop hitting the other. There comes a time where a person grows hesitant to retaliate.

Hesitancy means that retaliation is not guaranteed. It provides a way to de-escalate, and to not be hurt any more. It is a natural part of self interest, and our desire to not suffer. This is what makes us human and not machines, and why the MAD doctrine is unrealistic.

When players are using nuclear weapons, I believe that hesitancy would be felt a lot sooner than it would  with stick hitting. So much so that a first strike might well be tolerated.

Imagine your NATO ally gets hit, and you're just glad it wasn't your cities. You feel sympathy for your ally and very scared what might happen next. But that nuclear strike is now in the past and the past cannot be changed. If you let it slide, that might be as far as the nuclear conflict goes, which is a very attractive prospect. You hope for de-escalation from there on out. So will you launch any of your nukes, to avenge your ally? Because doing so WILL escalate the conflict. It could very well mean that your nation becomes the next target, and your cities end up as radioactive char. So you hesitate. Do you really want to invite a nuclear strike against your own nation? Is the "principle" of retaliation really so important that it is worth the price? The survivors in your cities will roam sightless through the smouldering aftermath no doubt feeling happy and proud that principles were upheld, because they'll have absolutely nothing else to feel happy about.