Nuclear winter theory (from the 1980s) probably wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small. Some talk of nuclear autumn instead. There's also an alternative nuclear summer (think Fallout).

No nuclear spring as in FarCry 5.

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it could take place.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.

Nuclear winter theory (from the 1980s) probably wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small. Some talk of nuclear autumn instead. There's also an alternative nuclear summer (think Fallout).

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it could take place.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.

Nuclear winter theory (from the 1980s) probably wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small. Some say of nuclear autumn instead. There's also an alternative nuclear summer (think Fallout).

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it could take place.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.

Nuclear winter theory (from the 1980s) probably wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small. Some say of nuclear autumn instead There's also an alternative nuclear summer (think Fallout).

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it could take place.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.

Nuclear winter theory (from the 1980s) is long debunked. It wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small.

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it could take place.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.

Nuclear winter is long debunked. It wouldn't have happened even during the Cold War, and nowadays the nuclear arsenals are relatively small.

Anyway, in case if there's a confusion, and I think there is, it's about foiling a nuclear strike in first place, before it coukd happen.

Instead of (as it's being threatened now) NATO obliterating Russian forces in a massive conventional (mostly USAF) offensive as a response to a nuclear attack only after it happened.