How daring, EBR.
For goodness' sake, say it straight or not at all. You're not good at being a sneak about it and you're embarrassing yourself trying.
Speaking of delivery systems, would that mean that a much more significant amount of nuclear warheads would be put into bombers? If they're capable of carrying heavy spacecraft then those must be able to carry some good amount of nukes, musn't they? The catch is, no one would have wanted bombers flying somewhere near their airspace for that matter, and they wouldn't want their own to be preemptively detected and intercepted too.
Would the geopolitcal reality still necessitate I C B M ' s ?
No SAMs yet, though it's only a matter of time. High altitude interception still needs an aircraft to go up there and gun it down.
Probably there'll be...say, two generations of high altitude supersonic bombers, and then it's edge-of-space ramjets or ICBMs.
EDIT:Or orbital weapons.
The H. Drakensis would wax endlessly about how they were clearly the superior species destined to triumph in this conflict of species and wills as they were picked off one by one and deboned.
For the First Gen, they'd only be waxing until after the first few kills have set a pattern. They haven't had mental flexibility entirely engineered out of them.
EDIT: Third Gen would be boned. Well, deboned, but also boned.
