Editing Mutual assured destruction (section)

==== Land-based MIRVed ICBMs threaten MAD ====
[[Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle|MIRVed]] land-based ICBMs are generally considered suitable for a first strike (inherently [[counterforce]]) or a counterforce [[second strike]], due to:
# Their high accuracy (low [[circular error probable]]), compared to submarine-launched ballistic missiles which used to be less accurate, and more prone to defects;
# Their fast response time, compared to bombers which are considered too slow;
# Their ability to carry multiple MIRV warheads at once, useful for destroying a whole missile field or several cities with one missile.

Unlike a [[decapitation strike]] or a [[countervalue strike]], a [[counterforce strike]] might result in a potentially more constrained retaliation. Though the Minuteman III of the mid-1960s was MIRVed with three warheads, heavily MIRVed vehicles threatened to upset the balance; these included the [[SS-18 Satan]] which was deployed in 1976, and was considered to threaten [[Minuteman III]] silos, which led [[Team B|some]] [[neoconservatives]] to conclude a [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] first strike was being prepared for.{{citation needed|date=August 2021}} This led to the development of the aforementioned [[Pershing II]], the [[Trident I]] and [[Trident II]], as well as the [[MX missile]], and the [[B-1 Lancer]].

MIRVed land-based [[ICBM]]s are considered destabilizing because they tend to put a premium on striking first. When a missile is MIRVed, it is able to carry many [[warhead]]s (up to eight in existing US missiles, limited by [[New START]], though Trident II is capable of carrying up to 12<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://missilethreat.com/missiles/ugm-133-trident-d-5/ |title=UGM-133 Trident D-5 - Missile ThreatTrident 2 &#124; Missile Threat |access-date=2015-02-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151027084659/http://missilethreat.com/missiles/ugm-133-trident-d-5/ |archive-date=2015-10-27 |url-status=dead }}</ref>) and deliver them to separate targets. If it is assumed that each side has 100 missiles, with five warheads each, and further that each side has a 95 percent chance of neutralizing the opponent's missiles in their silos by firing two warheads at each silo, then the attacking side can reduce the enemy ICBM force from 100 missiles to about five by firing 40 missiles with 200 warheads, and keeping the rest of 60 missiles in reserve. As such, this type of weapon was intended to be banned under the [[START II]] agreement; however, the START II agreement was never brought into force, and neither Russia nor the United States ratified the agreement.