question

Such a confronation involving the U.S. seems unlikely. The only nuclear power likely or capable to face off with the U.S. in a nuclear confrontation has vanished, or at least mutated into something that seems very unlikely to challenge the U.S.

China has nuclear-warhead ICBMs in its inventory that can reach the U.S. But the last time I heard anything on the issue, the Chinese had very few such missiles, and there was no effort to increase its inventory. So I don't know if China could effectively challenge the U.S. But even if it had the capability, China can't afford to kill us. We owe them way too much money. And everybody knows that. So any threat would be empty. I'm not kidding.

As far as I know, there are no other countries in the world that are or were enemies of the U.S. which have nuclear-warhead missiles in their weapons inventories.

However, there is a low-level, potentially nuclear standoff going on every day between India and Pakistan. And the Cuba in that standoff is the disputed border region called Kashmir. And because the dispute involves religious differences, it has the potential to escalate at any moment.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

I know very little about these things, but wouldn't existence of better intercontinental missiles and the existence of bomber subs (for less warning) make emplacing land-based missiles close to us a less useful option?