About when did a US/CCCP war become suicidal?

In article . net,
"Carey Sublette" wrote:

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
Comments:
1) It is true that there is no theoretical limit to the size of a TNW.
The practical limit is when the bomb vents to space rather than
expanding across the surface of the earth. Big bombs are impractical
since they blow the hell out of the hypocenter (spot directly under
the bomb) but the radius of destruction increases as the cube root of
the bomb's yield. One could take the same amount of critical material
and make numerous smaller bombs and achieve a much greater area of
destruction by carefully distributing them over the target zone.

The fundamental reason why 'Ivan', the Tsar Bomba, had no relevance to
the
strategic balance was that it was undeliverable against the U.S. The
weight
of this bomb - 27 tonnes - was nearly equal to the Tu-95's maximum
payload,
and two and a half times its normal weapon load. Range of the Tu-95 was
already marginal for attacking the U.S. even with a normal bomb load.
Even
worse, since the bomb's dimensions - 2 meters wide and 8 meters long -
were
larger than the bomb bay could accommodate part of the fuselage had to be
cut away, and the bomb bay doors removed. The bomb was partially recessed
in
the plane, but not enclosed, with over half of it protruding in flight. A
deployed version of a Tsar Bomba carrier would of course had a bulging
bomb
bay enclosure added, but this would have further reduced range from the
drag.


Clearly, it was unsuitable as an aircraft-delivered weapon. While I
tend to think the motivations were propaganda and perhaps some
technologists gone wild, I would not, however, dismiss it is unusable.
Impractical and fraught with risks? Of course.

Ship or submarine delivery systems, probably sacrificing the delivery
platform, certainly wouldn't have the same restrictions on cubage and
weight. Would we have been as alert then to a third-country tramp
steamer?

Conceivably, there might be some prepositioned ground options, perhaps
in Germany, as an ultimate deterrent against a NATO counterstrike.

Even nastier would be placement on seabeds.